Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: K-KEN on January 03, 2010, 01:53:20 PM
-
Going back to Air Warrior, and HiTech knows, our old Bombers had the opportunity to allow gunners for each gunner position. I know there have been posts on this but I didn't bother to look back thru the list.
We used to call them "Death Stars" (B17s) as each position (7) offered an opportunity for players in a squad (or anyone) to jump in and gun for a run. I have been a chin gunner, tail gunner, top turret...etc, and it was always fun to do - we even did all-nighters in them!!
(10PM est til 7am Sat morning) I was a bit younger then..... :old: :joystick: :lol
It is also a deterrant for folks to run up behind a buff "not knowing" if it was gunned. hehehe
Please Allow and Configure all guns to be manned during all bomber and fighter sorties where there are more than 2 positions within the aircraft.
This would be great in the MA and in Scenarios, as well.
-
+1
-
Without going into a major techni-babble, you have to choose whether you want to be able to fire all guns with all non-manned guns following your lead but only one gunner allowed (Aces High) or only one gun firing per player no matter what the joined configuration, whcih leaves solo pilots with one gun to defend themselves with (Air Warrior). You can't have both.
If you'd like the long version of it, I can attempt to cut an audio clip of HiTech explaining it.
-
Without going into a major techni-babble, you have to choose whether you want to be able to fire all guns with all non-manned guns following your lead but only one gunner allowed (Aces High) or only one gun firing per player no matter what the joined configuration, whcih leaves solo pilots with one gun to defend themselves with (Air Warrior). You can't have both.
If you'd like the long version of it, I can attempt to cut an audio clip of HiTech explaining it.
Since I never use the Fire All (N) option-I have one mapping for my stick, a one size fits all if you will, I still see no reason why if any player joined to me should be able to select the (F) fire option as his default since it's my current configuration. If a waist gunner uses the Fire all (N) option then all Left Waist or Right waist guns would also fire but based on his particular position in the plane. Other guns should not fire. I am not suggesting 20 gunners per formation, only 1 per gun in the main A/C :)
If I am in the tail and use (F) (my default) then just that plane fires. If I press (N) then all tail guns only should fire. I can see the argument for the top or ball turrets firing or not while I am in the tail gun. They should not. Maybe if there was a coding for 3 or more gunners joined then it disables Fire All (N) like when on the ground, for example. A B17 with a top, ball, and tail gunner alone would be devastating-even if they used (F) or (N). I could program my stick for GVs and bombers or fighters independently, but I chose not to. I don't use stick mapping in game.
:D when I did a spell check, "techni-babble" suggested:
Dishonorable
Dishonourable
Dishonorably and
Dishonourably ...talk about PC spelling and maybe your inference!! :rofl
-
It has to do with gunners swapping seats and "colliding." With the multi-gunner system, people can't move.
-
I think you should be aloowed 1 gunner per bird :salute
-
It has to do with the coding of the guns, NOT the turning them off or on. So what HT said was he could code it only one of the two ways. Either you can gun all spots by your self, or you can have room for single gunners. If they switched it over to "deathstar" mode can you imagine the people begging for gunners on every trip as they will no longer be able to cover all the guns themselves. I had also heard that there was network issues with that many people in the same "space" of the 3D world.
-
It's not broken... let's not fix it.
-
As much as I like going up against fighters in my "Vorpal Bomber +3", I gotta say no to this if its an either/or thing versus the current way of doing things. :airplane:
-
As much as I like going up against fighters in my "Vorpal Bomber +3", I gotta say no to this if its an either/or thing versus the current way of doing things. :airplane:
ok if we cannot have multiple gunners, then lets bring a26. :pray.
semp
-
+1 for A-26!
-
Nope.
-
You could fully-man a B-17 in Warbirds 2.0 when HT/Pyro still owned it.
-
It's not broken... let's not fix it.
as much as it would be cool as for the info available it seems tough to do as us players would like/enjoy. so the above quote applys to me as well. (would it be cool to have 4 guys in a b17 and still allow all guns to fire? yes. but it seems to be a bigger problem than it is worth working on.)
new aircraft/gv's and bug fixes would be higher on my list than messing with what is basically still a good/working thing.
-
Without going into a major techni-babble, you have to choose whether you want to be able to fire all guns with all non-manned guns following your lead but only one gunner allowed (Aces High) or only one gun firing per player no matter what the joined configuration, whcih leaves solo pilots with one gun to defend themselves with (Air Warrior). You can't have both.
If you'd like the long version of it, I can attempt to cut an audio clip of HiTech explaining it.
Hendrick did attempt a version of AW that never went far beyond open Beta (call it AW4 if you wish) it was based upon a flight model concept that was (in execution) very poor. However this version did also have B17's that could fire guns in sync and or have multiple players as gunners. They were not available online in formations they could however out turn Zekes with ease :eek:.............. The end was already well in sight.........
-
i think it's fine the way it is :aok
-
Hendrick did attempt a version of AW that never went far beyond open Beta (call it AW4 if you wish) it was based upon a flight model concept that was (in execution) very poor. However this version did also have B17's that could fire guns in sync and or have multiple players as gunners. They were not available online in formations they could however out turn Zekes with ease :eek:.............. The end was already well in sight.........
B-17s were able to out turn any fighter in AW ever since early days of AW4W and also was probably the best stall fighter in the game.
ack-ack
-
Oh no more than 1 gunner in 1 Plane? and when someone farts?
-
Whatcha tryin to do? K-K-k-kill me K-k-k Ken?? :bolt:
-
Ok if there is a problem with having 7 gunners in a single plane then set it up so you can only take 6 gunners. Randomize it so only 2 per formation is in the plane.
If you are in the belly gun you operate the belly gun for all 3 planes.also if 1 of the guns of the positions on 1 plane is hit that you are in, POOOOF back to the tower.
What say you all???
-
The reasons for not doing have already been well explained, however it would be an interesting experiment, simply because I believe a formation of buffs with all the gun positions filled out mostly by in-duh-viduals with "locked cockpits" would be less effective on average than the linked gun system with a decent individual gunner.
EDIT: Especially if gunners firing from one buff could kill/killshoot by hitting other bombers in their formation.
-
The reasons for not doing have already been well explained, however it would be an interesting experiment, simply because I believe a formation of buffs with all the gun positions filled out mostly by in-duh-viduals with "locked cockpits" would be less effective on average than the linked gun system with a decent individual gunner.
EDIT: Especially if gunners firing from one buff could kill/killshoot by hitting other bombers in their formation.
Which does, if I may, add some semblance of realism to the plane and formations. In R/L 3 gunners did not always fire at once. A gunners skills and some luck either kept the plane aloft and they all rtb'd or got it shot down.
But I am also realistic, this isn't Air Warrior. I just thought it was a fun feature...and of course, it IS doable, for obvious reasons.
-
Yeah, if you had more than one gunner and both gunners hit "all fire", then which gunner would the other positions direct their fire to?
Could have it battlefield 1942 style. This pretty much means that you get rid of the "all fire" function and allow players to move around to each position, but a position cannot be occupied by more than one player. Don't know how this would work with drones though.
-
As I stated before, the biggest problem lies in gunners being able to switch seats. If you have more than one gunner, the possibility to collide moving into the same seat presents itself and there's no desirable solution to that. You can have one gunner that can move about, or multiple gunners locked in their seats. Means you need at least four gunners to protect an aircraft from all angles.
-
As I stated before, the biggest problem lies in gunners being able to switch seats. If you have more than one gunner, the possibility to collide moving into the same seat presents itself and there's no desirable solution to that. You can have one gunner that can move about, or multiple gunners locked in their seats. Means you need at least four gunners to protect an aircraft from all angles.
Air Warrior (the early home of HiTech) had a message that the position was full. I do not remember if the gunner position required a request command, but I believe it did and you "saw" any open position(s) by virtue of a pop-up screen. Might have to fire up the old PC and check it - since my mind is getting feeble! :old: It did not deal with formations and is, IMHO, where the rub comes in... I am certain. When the gun is destroyed, then you would have to leave or just die in place.
I think there was a Navigator/Observer position also, which was worthless, but let you be in the plane just for the fun of it.
EDIT: As an aside, the pilot was not able to be a gunner. <period> It did not take 4 gunners to protect you, BUT the more the better :). Tail and Ball were usually enough for most attacks but in all reality, even a Death Star could be downed fully gunned. (Pilot Killed)
-
Putting up a pop-up screen saying the position is manned requires querying the server and receiving the result, thereby delaying the movement. I personally don't know what kind of numbers the AW server dealt with, but I'd suppose it's less that AH does. Especially during a congested event like an FSO or Scenario. Can you imagine the tears the server would have shed if all of our game clients had to request gun change status before moving to them in Der Grosse Schlag? *shudder* Not to mention the resultant five or ten second wait to get into said gun if the server couldn't keep up...
-
Putting up a pop-up screen saying the position is manned requires querying the server and receiving the result, thereby delaying the movement. I personally don't know what kind of numbers the AW server dealt with, but I'd suppose it's less that AH does. Especially during a congested event like an FSO or Scenario. Can you imagine the tears the server would have shed if all of our game clients had to request gun change status before moving to them in Der Grosse Schlag? *shudder* Not to mention the resultant five or ten second wait to get into said gun if the server couldn't keep up...
It may have been the pilot that controlled the position-can't recall, but the arenas in AW were usually 125-200 people max. Our maxi arena was a Scenario for Big Week set to carry 1,000 players. It did not deliver. We used dialup back in the day and set the modem to 9600 baud to keep packet loss down/warping. :eek: Air Warrior had a huge following and was certainly comparable to AH as far as numbers. We had Relaxed realism and Full Realism arenas and BigPac and others with land captures, strats, and all....bases were named after players and designers. It was a cult following for sure! :aok We still have many folks chatting in forums like BigWeek, there is even a scheduled reunion this year. It went out in 2000/2001 as (I recall) many players are here but many have moved on too.
-
It may have been the pilot that controlled the position-can't recall, but the arenas in AW were usually 125-200 people max. Our maxi arena was a Scenario for Big Week set to carry 1,000 players. It did not deliver. We used dialup back in the day and set the modem to 9600 baud to keep packet loss down/warping. :eek: Air Warrior had a huge following and was certainly comparable to AH as far as numbers. We had Relaxed realism and Full Realism arenas and BigPac and others with land captures, strats, and all....bases were named after players and designers. It was a cult following for sure! :aok We still have many folks chatting in forums like BigWeek, there is even a scheduled reunion this year. It went out in 2000/2001 as (I recall) many players are here but many have moved on too.
BigWeek newsgroup still around? And howdy K-Ken <S>
ack-ack
-
BigWeek newsgroup still around? And howdy K-Ken <S>
ack-ack
It is.........
-
It's not broken... let's not fix it.
+1
-
It may have been the pilot that controlled the position-can't recall, but the arenas in AW were usually 125-200 people max.
I remember organizing a mission with two countries and over 300 airplanes against the bz (If I remember correctly). the number of flyers back then may not have been the numbers here, but they were well over 200, dropping to about 20 to 30 at nite and that was just in one arena, I mostly plaid in the pacific. (I played 24/7 back then :))
semp
-
Im actually for this one, having all your mates in a B17's individual positions would be EPIC. The atmosphere would be fantastic, everyone calling out bandits and their direction of travel, when they are firing etc.
Plus it would let me take a whole mob of squeakers to a HQ in just 3 planes :D. :rock
-
ok if we cannot have multiple gunners, then lets bring a26. :pray.
semp
Yep. A-26 will own any and all other bombers.
A-26 FTW!!!
-
It is.........
Still PW protected? Been quite a few years since visiting there, lost all that stuff in a reformat about 5-6 years ago.
ack-ack
-
Im actually for this one, having all your mates in a B17's individual positions would be EPIC. The atmosphere would be fantastic, everyone calling out bandits and their direction of travel, when they are firing etc.
That's exactly why it would be epic. But just how often is a player going to be able to load that many people into a plane? Especially newer people who haven't found their clic yet.
It's the other times that would make it a bomber ruiner. With that system in place, any empty gun is...an empty gun. Defending yourself either becomes a chore or (if implemented like in the previous game) impossible.
-
I need all the help from those dang typhies and 38s I can get :aok
-
ok how bout this.....1 gunner per PLANE!!! in a formation, there are 3 planes, 1 person can be assigned to each bomber.
-JRjolly
-
That's exactly why it would be epic. But just how often is a player going to be able to load that many people into a plane? Especially newer people who haven't found their clic yet.
It's the other times that would make it a bomber ruiner. With that system in place, any empty gun is...an empty gun. Defending yourself either becomes a chore or (if implemented like in the previous game) impossible.
Pretty often I would imagine, I don't understand why we can't just lock gunners into one position by using dot commands.
.join tailgun xxx
.accept xxx
I can grasp at the coding struggle all of our suggestions would be for HT and am happy with the way it is now, but the idea of a death star does sound really fun.
-
Pretty often I would imagine, I don't understand why we can't just lock gunners into one position by using dot commands.
Because it's one of those features many people think they want but would detest or never use when we got it.