Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: ozrocker on October 03, 2010, 12:38:24 PM
-
How about some destroyable a/c and/or vehicles on the tarmac, nonusable to players if preferred, or usable till destroyed. Eye candy I suppose, but does add to realism.
Now for the other. How about making the runways craterable to limit/cease flight ops at base. If even non-improved r/w capable a/c try to lift on damaged areas, would make interesting/challenging to be able to lift.
Would help appease the "win the war" crowd, as well as furballers trying to defend from another field.
Maybe make craters "repair" as others do in AH, with time/resupply.
eh, an idea anyway,
<S> Oz
-
No no no to cratering runways, if you want to fly alone there is always offline.
-
I like the idea of static AC at the airfields, gives a touch of realism.
-
I like the idea of static AC at the airfields, gives a touch of realism.
+1
-
Good idea. Yes static vehicles, that could become smoldering, smoke spewing hulks and stay for 10min or so.
-
2 words, frame rate. All those "objects" can have an impact on it, the more objects, the bigger the problem. HTC is doing an awesome job of keeping the object count down on fields so you don't have your frame rate drop dramaticly just because your over a field at less than 5k.
As to cratering runways, are you guys really telling me that you'd rather not be able to up from a contested field because someone dropped a couple of bombs in the middle? Really?
I don't know about the rest of you, but I've flown in that, and frankly it wasn't fun.
-
Craters no.....definatly not....I still like the idea of static aircraft though
-
I figure cratering would temporarily add more to the base attacking aspect, sort of like the "porking" of fuel used to. Making the defenders counter from a close field.
As far as FR is concerned, can make it same as current AH "eye candy". optional/limited (lower graphics).
<S> Oz
-
Good idea. Yes static vehicles, that could become smoldering, smoke spewing hulks and stay for 10min or so.
IN :aok
-
Didn't AH version 1 have that? you could destroy a runway.............
-
But craters would give me reason to revert back to my noob days and bomb the run way from one end to the other! :devil :neener:
But no, AC on the ground would be pretty cool. Always enjoyed watching guncam footage of A/C on the ground going up in strafing attacks!
-
Didn't AH version 1 have that? you could destroy a runway.............
Yep, a few thousand pounds of bombs and the runway went poof. Trust me you would not want that because once the runway was gone any landing at the base was a ditch, even if you landed on the dirt part where the runway used to be.
-
Yep, a few thousand pounds of bombs and the runway went poof. Trust me you would not want that because once the runway was gone any landing at the base was a ditch, even if you landed on the dirt part where the runway used to be.
Just taxi over to a pad :aok
-
Just taxi over to a pad :aok
Pads didn't exist at the time, when the runway disappeared it took ALL base concrete with it.
-
No to random scrubs porking all the runways 24/7 but the plane objects of the field will be awsome. :aok
-
Forget craters.
Why add planes?
Aside from totally changing the gameplay radically with some sort of reason for them to be there (*cough*limiting_planes_that_can_up*cough*), with the CURRENT gameplay.... Why add random AI planes parked on a field?
For free points? Not good enough.
What reason at all would there be?
I'll kill real planes, thanks.
-
Simple. IMMERSION. They can be as useful as the building in the Port that do nothing when you destroy them. Nobody suggested anything towards game play for the static planes, nor any points towards it. No need to put out a fire that hasn't started. All that gets you is a very wet house that will probably start to have mildew.
-
Forget craters.
Why add planes?
Aside from totally changing the gameplay radically with some sort of reason for them to be there (*cough*limiting_planes_that_can_up*cough*), with the CURRENT gameplay.... Why add random AI planes parked on a field?
For free points? Not good enough.
What reason at all would there be?
I'll kill real planes, thanks.
They can make the airfield look all pretty just like those trees they added in the field patch. :)
-
How about:
replace a FH object with some "static" fighter aircraft
replace a BH object with some "static" bomber aircraft
Keep the "damage required to kill" the same.
Keep the re-pop time the same.
Thus they have purpose but don't change game play dramatically
-
How about:
replace a FH object with some "static" fighter aircraft
replace a BH object with some "static" bomber aircraft
Keep the "damage required to kill" the same.
Keep the re-pop time the same.
Thus they have purpose but don't change game play dramatically
I really like that, sounds like it'd be awesome.
-
craters in runway that damge your plane
-
Only drawback with this idea (of damaged R/W) would be the whines, but golden rule would be: Don't up from capped field.
-
Craters on the runway would have very little impact to the average player. Since you can take off just about anywhere on the field or beside it, it's easy to avoid those craters on the runway.
However, it could have an affect on the auto take-off guys. For that alone: +1. :D
-
Bah, who needs a runway to take off or land, so who cares if they can crater it?
-
no to craters, yes to planes on airfield tied to a strat or hangers some how.
-
Only drawback with this idea (of damaged R/W) would be the whines, but golden rule would be: Don't up from capped field.
The field doesn't have to be capped to be cratered. Plus if they crater the spawns, it won't matter
if it's capped or not. I can't think of a single WW2 aircraft that can perform a takeoff with no gear.
-
I figure cratering would temporarily add more to the base attacking aspect, sort of like the "porking" of fuel used to. Making the defenders counter from a close field.
simple, kill the fighter hangars and you dont need to worry about disabling a runway
-
instead of dropping eggs on runways and being a noobish dweeb, you could make it a challenge and drop the HANGERS like your supposed to if youd like to sieze flight. if you could crater a runway you could just drop an egg right on the spawn and the planes spawning would fall in a pit and not be able to get out... sounds kinda lame to me dont like it, not fair ,game would be ruined and have no point. BUT the idea of static aircraft parked on field would be nice to see. <S>
RedTail
-
How about:
replace a FH object with some "static" fighter aircraft
replace a BH object with some "static" bomber aircraft
Keep the "damage required to kill" the same.
Keep the re-pop time the same.
Thus they have purpose but don't change game play dramatically
really.. i think that is completely stupid in my opinion for 1 how am i supposed to take out the FH and BH if there is no hanger to drop. And 2 if this did happen i could just shot the aircraft as it REPLACED the hanger with anything and it would be destroyed no bombs or rockets required... poitless really
-
instead of dropping eggs on runways and being a noobish dweeb, you could make it a challenge and drop the HANGERS like your supposed to if youd like to sieze flight. if you could crater a runway you could just drop an egg right on the spawn and the planes spawning would fall in a pit and not be able to get out... sounds kinda lame to me dont like it, not fair ,game would be ruined and have no point. BUT the idea of static aircraft parked on field would be nice to see. <S>
RedTail
really.. i think that is completely stupid in my opinion for 1 how am i supposed to take out the FH and BH if there is no hanger to drop. And 2 if this did happen i could just shot the aircraft as it REPLACED the hanger with anything and it would be destroyed no bombs or rockets required... poitless really
Three things:
1. Your arguments seem to contradict each other, please read them and realize you are being a ninny.
2. Learn how to use correct grammar and spelling.
3. Smack whoever let you pass your English class.
Because of the faults mentioned by 1+2, I have no clue what you are saying.
Good Day.
~GowGows.
-
Three things:
1. Your arguments seem to contradict each other, please read them and realize you are being a ninny.
2. Learn how to use correct grammar and spelling.
3. Smack whoever let you pass your English class.
Because of the faults mentioned by 1+2, I have no clue what you are saying.
Good Day.
~GowGows.
some1 needs to learn how to quote other messages correctly