A ground-up feature jazzing-up wish.

[Myg]

I figure the best way to find ways to improve a game is to start from the ground up.

So, lets try some of the following ideas!
(Some are repeats of things I have read here and like, by others)

- O'club general message board and a "letter" system to leave private messages to other players when they log in (might even extend this to back and fourth email by using user account email address (HTC keeps this and uses it to send you emails already)? Bit much maybe).

- Mini-games in the O'club (Single player only maybe? interruptable by arena actions ofc), to show the level of maturity and understanding of commonality that has gone into this game (see O'club poker thread as well).

- Custom logo's for each plane (and not just for squads, but allow squads larger logos than personal ones).

- Mixable/changable ammo loadouts/ammo types.

- Remove names of those you kill, but keep the message of who killed you, to cut down on name head-hunting. (Do you guys think this is a good idea? :/)

- White-board in O'club for some generic drawing fun and scribbling with the ability for adding map overlays for planning missions. (Interruptible like the O'club mini-games and I guess this should extend to everything else in the O'club).

- Disable auto climb for fighters (to properly represent the fact that bombers have a co-pilot), does not effect auto-level or auto-angle for fighters.

- Disable F3 mode unless on ground (to properly represent being able to get out and look at your plane from the outside).

- Remove combat trim/auto take-off/engine governor as separate options, and link them to stall limiter (might need a re-name).

- Kill/score decals on your plane when you are on a streak (on a sortie basis only ofc).

- Static 3d model based icons over planes that grow larger/smaller as you get closer/further (Thought this might be fun to see if it works practically).

- Gunners need to get significantly more/quicker updates from the plane they are attached to (possible to leverage direct p2p style connection for this?).

- Bombers should allow two pilots, as well as a gunner.

- Gunner rota's with an automated attachment system for opt-in pilots, if your idling on the ground for a certain time, it will automatically attach you to a bomber/gunner position.

- Remove the mannablility of AA/AT positions (to refocus the air/ground combat).

- Implement subs and gliders(which spawn a tank or a vehicle upon landing (glider despawns))

- More later war birds  

- More varieties of A2A cannon/guns.  

- More bullet dispersion (simulated wind effects on trajectory).

- Fancier terrain (more polygons).

- CV control screen for person in command to give coordinates and locations for offshore shelling.

[Zacherof]

- Remove combat trim/auto take-off/engine governor as separate options, and link them to stall limiter (might need a re-name). So what your saying, is that when you uncheck the stall limiter box, you get/disable all these fetures?

Everything else is sounding pretty neat.

[gyrene81]

- Disable auto climb for fighters (to properly represent the fact that bombers have a co-pilot), does not effect auto-level or auto-angle for fighters.

- Disable F3 mode unless on ground (to properly represent being able to get out and look at your plane from the outside).

- Bombers should allow two pilots, as well as a gunner.

- Fancier terrain (more polygons).

- CV control screen for person in command to give coordinates and locations for offshore shelling.

those are the only things that make sense and may be desirable.

- Gunners need to get significantly more/quicker updates from the plane they are attached to (possible to leverage direct p2p style connection for this?).

that is completely controlled by internet connectivity and p2p would not improve anything...

[RedBull1]

I figure the best way to find ways to improve a game is to start from the ground up.

So, lets try some of the following ideas!
(Some are repeats of things I have read here and like, by others)

- O'club general message board and a "letter" system to leave private messages to other players when they log in (might even extend this to back and fourth email by using user account email address (HTC keeps this and uses it to send you emails already)? Bit much maybe). Sounds good +1

- Mini-games in the O'club (Single player only maybe? interruptable by arena actions ofc), to show the level of maturity and understanding of commonality that has gone into this game (see O'club poker thread as well). Maybe one day, but many more important things to add than mini games, first. -1

- Custom logo's for each plane (and not just for squads, but allow squads larger logos than personal ones). I don't see why not, but, then again almost no one will notice this, I know that even when I am in a close knife fight with someone the very last thing I am looking for/at is their squad logo on their plane, I never have (not even once) noticed a squad logo on an aircraft I was fighting. (Their skin, however, is a different story) -1 for now

- Mixable/changable ammo loadouts/ammo types. Why? Seems a little gamey, I don't see why this would've been done IRL -1

- Remove names of those you kill, but keep the message of who killed you, to cut down on name head-hunting. (Do you guys think this is a good idea? :/) Uh..Nah, good concept, I see what you mean, but no -1

- White-board in O'club for some generic drawing fun and scribbling with the ability for adding map overlays for planning missions. (Interruptible like the O'club mini-games and I guess this should extend to everything else in the O'club). Hell yea! I wanna draw to the other guys in the tower +1!

- Disable auto climb for fighters (to properly represent the fact that bombers have a co-pilot), does not effect auto-level or auto-angle for fighters.Nah, there's no reason for us fighter pilots to have to sit there and manually hold the stick and climb for 10 minutes -1

- Disable F3 mode unless on ground (to properly represent being able to get out and look at your plane from the outside).while I agree with this, being someone who used to fly bombers a lot, I know how beneficial F3 is for them without ruining anyones experience in being overly gamey so -1 there, HOWEVER I do believe aircraft like the A20 should undoubtedly have F3 removed!

- Remove combat trim/auto take-off/engine governor as separate options, and link them to stall limiter (might need a re-name). that sounds fair +1 (However, note: You have the option to disabled Auto-Takeoff in the options with the stall limiter

- Kill/score decals on your plane when you are on a streak (on a sortie basis only ofc). I'd +1 this, but again refer to me previous post about squad logos on planes

- Static 3d model based icons over planes that grow larger/smaller as you get closer/further (Thought this might be fun to see if it works practically).Basically our current icon system with differing sizes depending on distance? +1 would help a lot with SA IMO, simply glancing quickly at how big the icon is to judge distance

- Gunners need to get significantly more/quicker updates from the plane they are attached to (possible to leverage direct p2p style connection for this?).huh? Seems fine to me but I might have misunderstood this one

- Bombers should allow two pilots, as well as a gunner.From my understanding you used to be able to have as many gunners as your aircraft could fit! But it was removed for some reason I wish you could do this though +1

- Gunner rota's with an automated attachment system for opt-in pilots, if your idling on the ground for a certain time, it will automatically attach you to a bomber/gunner position.Attach AFK pilots in the hangar to buff pilots essentially taking up one of his gunner seats and being useless? Not to mention this wouldn't work with the scoring system -1

- Remove the mannablility of AA/AT positions (to refocus the air/ground combat).That's a great idea for increasing A/A combat, but it would suck if you were getting vulched. -1

- Implement subs and gliders(which spawn a tank or a vehicle upon landing (glider despawns))lol... uhm...lol.. +1 I guess?

- More later war birds  +1

- More varieties of A2A cannon/guns.  Why? We have plenty/most of the guns used on the aircraft we have, no need -1

- More bullet dispersion (simulated wind effects on trajectory). Bullets are affected by wind in AH actually. otherwise fly an aircraft like the K4 and check out the 30mm dispersion, wish granted -1

- Fancier terrain (more polygons). HUGE +1 but under the condition that it's an OPTION to have fancier terrain and if people with lesser computers wanted they could stick with the current graphics so it only helps the game/ player base

- CV control screen for person in command to give coordinates and locations for offshore shelling. Generally if the CV's offshore of an airbase, the gunners will shell that base/town, and believe me.. there's no shortage of armchair generals ready to scream at you to shell one thing or stop shelling another thing -1

[Myg]

Zack: yep

gyrene81: p2p based updates for the plane that the gunner is in, only, could potentially cut the delay down by half, depending on how close the gunner/pilot are which means that a gunner would actually be useful to have in combat manouvering situations. Like in d3a/tbm/etc.

RedBull1: Custom logo's might not be noticed, but its just to tip a nod towards the current expectations/abilities of other games in similar genre's without having to add much programically. You can also auto-angle just fine if you find a good climb, it isn't really going to effect those who know how to use that already, just make it more accurate in the sense of bombers vs fighters inherent abilities (having a co-pilot vs not). I don't understand what you mean about the gunner rota causing issue? You would have to submit yourself to the list first, before being transferred to the gunner list. Basically, its opt-in on both sides, So I don't see how this could mess up your score? We currently lack the crazy self propelled Japanese aircraft cannons/etc   . Gunners provide bombers with plenty of view as it is, so f3 only makes sense on the ground for all aircraft. Removing the mannable positions would simply put more people into whirbles and ostwinds quicker and earlier, making vulching harder. My understanding of things is that hitting stuff from 1.0 out was basically impossible historically, so there seems to be something missing in the equation/representation, I doubt it would effect the 30mm's useful and usually used in-game range of ~100m in the k4. The CV idea would just mean that people wont be using the mannable guns anymore and it will be controlled by a single person commanding the guns to shoot at a certain range/location, so; no armchair generals anymore, just the higher ranked guys asserting themselves.

[gyrene81]

gyrene81: p2p based updates for the plane that the gunner is in, only, could potentially cut the delay down by half, depending on how close the gunner/pilot are which means that a gunner would actually be useful to have in combat manouvering situations. Like in d3a/tbm/etc.

only if they're on the same subnet, i.e. same isp, same state, otherwise routing and all the associated problems come into play. i've never had a problem with lag as an attached gunner...my shooting skills just suck.

RedBull1: Custom logo's might not be noticed, but its just to tip a nod towards the current expectations/abilities of other games in similar genre's without having to add much programically.

i can think of only one mmo flight sim that allows client side only custom logos or skins unless something has drastically changed in the last 2 months, and the flight models in that game suck. all the others require custom skins to be submitted for approval and made available to all, and i know of 2 that don't even have an option for customization outside of what the company provides (meaning no player submissions). retail box games are the only ones that allow the sort of customization you're talking about and they don't have large scale player capacity, nor do they prevent people from programming cheats.

Gunners provide bombers with plenty of view as it is, so f3 only makes sense on the ground for all aircraft.

i don't really have a problem with that one but, you're failing to take into consideration that...not everyone wants to be a gunner in a bomber. and not everyone wants to have a gunner in their bombers. f3 mode in bombers is a trade-off/compromise.

Removing the mannable positions would simple put more people into whirbles and ostwinds quicker and earlier, making vulching *harder*. My understanding of things is that hitting stuff from 1.0 out was basically impossible historically, so there seems to be something missing in the equation/representation, I doubt it would effect the 30mm's useful and usually used in-game range of ~100m in the k4.

preventing people from manning gun positions on fields won't do anything close to what you're thinking. if manning a defensive field gun position isn't "focusing" on the air/ground combat aspect nothing is. 3000ft is not very long range for 20-40mm auto cannons and with the volume of ammunition that is sent down range it's not real difficult to hit something. no more so than 50cal. i believe you just don't like the idea of killing a manned gun and being denied a score like you would with a gv.

The CV idea would just mean that people wont be using the mannable guns anymore and it will be controlled by a single person commanding the guns to shoot at a certain range/location, so; no armchair generals anymore, just the higher ranked guys asserting themselves.

just as bad of an idea as removing mannable gun positions on fields. your desire to remove all player controllable defensive capabilities isn't likely to happen. players can already control ships according to their "rank", and if "asserting themselves" isn't being armchair generals i don't know what is.

[Myg]

gyrene, the projections of your own game desires onto me will only lead this conversation into a road of nonsense.

If you want to start psycho-analysis, start with yourself.

[gyrene81]

sorry Myg but...honestly, with the exception of maybe 2 or 3 items, this so called conversations started on a road of nonsense.

on the one hand you talk about getting more people into the air/ground combat aspect and on the other you want mini-games and a white board type thing in the oclub, so people have something to do outside of the air/ground combat aspect.

[VonMessa]

sorry Myg but...honestly, with the exception of maybe 2 or 3 items, this so called conversations started on a road of nonsense.

on the one hand you talk about getting more people into the air/ground combat aspect and on the other you want mini-games and a white board type thing in the oclub, so people have something to do outside of the air/ground combat aspect.

Can you pat your head and rub your tummy at the same time?

[gyrene81]

Can you pat your head and rub your tummy at the same time?

  talk about random...uh, yes i can. does that make me weird?

[VonMessa]

  talk about random...uh, yes i can. does that make me weird?

Not random.

This means that you should be able to play white-board games and fly at the same time.

However, those without this ability will be screwed.

[Bino]

...
- Remove the mannablility of AA/AT positions (to refocus the air/ground combat).

- Implement subs and gliders(which spawn a tank or a vehicle upon landing (glider despawns))

- More later war birds  

- More varieties of A2A cannon/guns.  

- More bullet dispersion (simulated wind effects on trajectory).

- Fancier terrain (more polygons).

- CV control screen for person in command to give coordinates and locations for offshore shelling.

I appreciate that you want to refocus on air/ground combat.  However, I have to take issue with every one of your last seven points, for the following reasons:

1.) You would make Vilkas very unhappy.  For me, that right there is enough to kill your entire list.

2.) Dedicated submarine games all use time compression to avoid literally weeks of boredom. Not an option for a flying game.  Gliders: maybe.  Illustrate how they would work...?  (Also, how are gliders and subs in the same category???)

3.) Aces High already has a late-war-centric plane set which limits historical events.

4.) Aces High is not Secret Weapons Of The Luftwaffe.  

5.) Projectile aerodynamics is already modeled.  What appears not to be modeled is mechanical flexing and vibration of wings and gun mounts.

6.) Not until HTC buys me the (very expensive) computer of my dreams.

7.) Admiral Numnutz already has too much control of fleets.

[Myg]

I appreciate that you want to refocus on air/ground combat.  However, I have to take issue with every one of your last seven points, for the following reasons:

1.) You would make Vilkas very unhappy.  For me, that right there is enough to kill your entire list.

2.) Dedicated submarine games all use time compression to avoid literally weeks of boredom. Not an option for a flying game.  Gliders: maybe.  Illustrate how they would work...?  (Also, how are gliders and subs in the same category???)

3.) Aces High already has a late-war-centric plane set which limits historical events.

4.) Aces High is not Secret Weapons Of The Luftwaffe.  

5.) Projectile aerodynamics is already modeled.  What appears not to be modeled is mechanical flexing and vibration of wings and gun mounts.

6.) Not until HTC buys me the (very expensive) computer of my dreams.

7.) Admiral Numnutz already has too much control of fleets.

 

[VonMessa]

What an educated and articulate response...

[gyrene81]

What an educated and articulate response...

give him a break Von, he had a good start...