With the new terrain in development, we're also kicking around ideas for airfeild layouts, ect....
I've attached a rough layout of a 4 mile by 4 mile "base" area. This one contains a large airfeild, vehicle complex, surrounding town, and possible supply depot.
Legend:
Dark green is forest / woods
Red lines are hedge / property lines
brown lines - dirt roads
Blue/White circles - town buildings
Yellow dots - supply depot?
Everything else is pretty much labelled.
The basic premise of going this way is to create a detailed centralized game area where most of the fighting takes place, which is normally within one to two miles of a base /town. We anticipate having a higher resolution elevations in these areas which will lend to more gentle hills /slopes and be very conducive for vehicle fights. Also it will allow us to alleviate some of the issues with taking off in heavy bombers, in which there will be longer runways, and clear paths for climb out.
Also, We would have different layouts for each type of base. So there would be more variance in towns/facility layouts, as well as strategies for base capture. Also, we just think that it looks more natural that a square mile airfield, with a square mile town next to it.
I just wanted to post this to you guys and get some feedback about it. It's still in very early planning stages, so the sky's not falling yet. :)
2 weeks?
I can't wait that long. I want this NOW!!! :O :O :x :x :x :x :x
I was referring to the sky falling :lol
Waffle i have only one suggestion . On one of the airfields . Have a layout that can be used like an obstacle course for planes. Rows of taller structures to fly between with open hangers to fly through. It would be nice to have a place where a person could work on precise control of their plane.Maybe a portside industrial complex would work too, cranes, factory smokestacks open sided warehouses to fly through...
Waffle i have only one suggestion . On one of the airfields . Have a layout that can be used like an obstacle course for planes. Rows of taller structures to fly between with open hangers to fly through. It would be nice to have a place where a person could work on precise control of their plane.you already fly thru the fighter and bomber hangers :joystick:
With the new terrain in development, we're also kicking around ideas for airfeild layouts, ect....
I've attached a rough layout of a 4 mile by 4 mile "base" area. This one contains a large airfeild, vehicle complex, surrounding town, and possible supply depot.
Legend:
Dark green is forest / woods
Red lines are hedge / property lines
brown lines - dirt roads
Blue/White circles - town buildings
Yellow dots - supply depot?
Everything else is pretty much labelled.
The basic premise of going this way is to create a detailed centralized game area where most of the fighting takes place, which is normally within one to two miles of a base /town. We anticipate having a higher resolution elevations in these areas which will lend to more gentle hills /slopes and be very conducive for vehicle fights. Also it will allow us to alleviate some of the issues with taking off in heavy bombers, in which there will be longer runways, and clear paths for climb out.
Also, We would have different layouts for each type of base. So there would be more variance in towns/facility layouts, as well as strategies for base capture. Also, we just think that it looks more natural that a square mile airfield, with a square mile town next to it.
I just wanted to post this to you guys and get some feedback about it. It's still in very early planning stages, so the sky's not falling yet. :)
I'm sure I'm not the only one who will say:
Grass/dirt/coral/marston mat strips!
For that matter, some variance in airfield for different terrain types (PTO vs Europe, etc) would be greatly welcome.
With the new terrain in development, we're also kicking around ideas for airfeild layouts, ect....
I've attached a rough layout of a 4 mile by 4 mile "base" area. This one contains a large airfeild, vehicle complex, surrounding town, and possible supply depot.
Legend:
Dark green is forest / woods
Red lines are hedge / property lines
brown lines - dirt roads
Blue/White circles - town buildings
Yellow dots - supply depot?
Everything else is pretty much labelled.
The basic premise of going this way is to create a detailed centralized game area where most of the fighting takes place, which is normally within one to two miles of a base /town. We anticipate having a higher resolution elevations in these areas which will lend to more gentle hills /slopes and be very conducive for vehicle fights. Also it will allow us to alleviate some of the issues with taking off in heavy bombers, in which there will be longer runways, and clear paths for climb out.
Also, We would have different layouts for each type of base. So there would be more variance in towns/facility layouts, as well as strategies for base capture. Also, we just think that it looks more natural that a square mile airfield, with a square mile town next to it.
I just wanted to post this to you guys and get some feedback about it. It's still in very early planning stages, so the sky's not falling yet. :)
The basic premise of going this way is to create a detailed centralized game area where most of the fighting takes place, which is normally within one to two miles of a base /town. We anticipate having a higher resolution elevations in these areas which will lend to more gentle hills /slopes and be very conducive for vehicle fights. Also it will allow us to alleviate some of the issues with taking off in heavy bombers, in which there will be longer runways, and clear paths for climb out.
Hate to say it but all else being equal, it looks like bigger hordes will be needed to take that base.
Once last time, I will make a futile and useless plea to take the fight away from the base. I think the towns should be far away from the fields (halfway to the dar circle) and undefended, with GV spawns from multiple fields near each town. Meanwhile, increase ack guns and their lethality on airfields to curtail vulching. Having the towns ack-free and away from the base would encourage more attacks and especially smaller ones would have a chance. Likewise, being able to get airborne without vulchers would give even a small defense a chance.
The attackers claim the defenders are hiding in the ack and the defenders claim the attackers don't let them leave the ack. With the fights in a more neutral location, there will be no need for either. As cool as the new layout looks, I foresee more steamrolling than ever. If that's actually possible. :uhoh
Whatever is done, I request for more than one radar tower. It is ridiculously easy to take out and virtually impossible to defend against a determined, suicide porker. A four mile field should have four towers.
Just my opinion, but is spreading the town out like that a good idea? Would you change the percentage of town being down in order for capture? Will having guys with lower end PC's not being able to crank up ground detail and detail range hinder them seeing all of these small details on a field? Frustrate them?
I rarely take bases, but I want to keep the food chain around the game so I have something to shoot at.
Again, looking at all possible aspects of the game. I'm sure there will be much more feedback to come in this thread.
Would a MOTD in the MA directing the entire player base to come check this out for more opinions be worth it? A lot of the land grabbing types I see in the game i rarely or never see on these boards.
The population of the game seems fragile right now, and I would hate to see something that doesn't appeal to the majority of the game, which at this point is land grabbing and GV'ing. Being a furballing type I could care less as long as you keep the game populated. :aok :cheers:
Randoms thoughts, not enough time to type the rest out. <S>
Some variation will be a nice change, the layout also makes it look like it will take more coordination to capture a base. This might not be a good thing since as far as I can tell, the only country with any kind of coordination for base taking is the bish.
Here is the RUB.....
Changes in the game system (I am wildly excited about), but will they take into the account for the most part there is no General for either country? Let me decode that last question. If base capture becomes so ramped up that only large missions or "hordes" will enjoy success, then you most likely will see a lot of lopsided maps, folks logging off because of too few choices to spawn, and worst of all more battles fought on the BBS than on these beautifully constructed enhanced battlefields. :(
Suggestion: Brand new concept, abandon the turf war all together. Make it a war of attrition = Successful attacks on bases, certain buildings, or targets reduce the morale, resources, communication, resupply lines or some other strategical explanation for the win the war goal. This way each country gets to keep all of their fields. At some point a bomber or jabo run to the two opposing HQs or any of a number of scenarios that would involve more than just a handful of players to seal the deal and ideally promote Air Combat.
Good Morning,
Again, just waxing out loud here - kicking out ideas, nothing set in stone.
In my head, the property lines / hedge rows would be more like sparse tree/shrub lines. Not like the current impassable hedges we have in the town now.
In regards to the spawns being not equal in distance to the map-room, I think that's really a moot issue, as currently it's the same way in game. You can spawn into a base from one way and be right on top of town, and some you have to drive over and across the airfield to get to town. It all depends on the luck of the draw on your countries spawn into a base when you're attacking a certain field.
As far as how hard it is to capture a base, we do have variables for the amount of town that has to be down in order to capture, which can be adjusted.
One idea was to have less town buildings for the medium / small /vehicle bases. Currently there is around 100 buildings in the town, which is what I was planning on for the large airfield. So maybe have 75 for the medium field, 50 for the small field, and 35-40 for the vehicle base. That would set up hierarchy of difficulty on capturing fields, which is something I'm not sure we would want to do.
We're still in discussion on how to do the road / rail system, So I really have no clue how that's going to turnout. The supply depot on the drawing was an idea on where to have the supply convoys terminate.
I'll tag this one as wishlist:
One thing I would like to see done in regards to base supply would be to have a large rail yard / distribution center for a zone of bases. Trains would leave the city for the distribution centers, then convoys would truck supplies from the distribution centers to the airfields. Destroying / damaging the Distribution center would slow down the resupply to the bases it supplies. If you kill a destroy a train heading to a distribution center, you would hinder the supply time for all of the bases that are supplied by that distribution center, as well as the rebuild time of the distribution center. Destroy a convoy and you hinder the supply to the field it was traveling to. This would make distribution centers and trains regional targets that need to be protected. I would also like to see dots for trains / convoys on the clipboard map when you have them enabled. Or maybe once a friendly gets within a certain range of train/convoy, it would show up as a dot for a period of time.
Another thought I had, is for base capture. if all auto ack / manned guns would have to be down, or just town guns. For this layout, I'm leaning towards town building only having to be down for capture. If you can get a goon or m3 in, and you or your troops don't die in the crossfire, you sir, deserve a medal. We'll have to discuss that one.
Like I said before, just kicking out ideas - nothing set in stone.
Thanks for sharing Waffle. i like a whole lot about this map. I would also like to see bridges, that are destroyable along rail and truck routes. Knock out the bridge, traffic backs up, slowing down resupply times and creating long lines of vehicles and trains ripe for the straifing from my beautiful 190A8.
Luftwaffe Uber Alles !
With town scapes coming complete with Gv hangers etc then I would use this as a gv facility. Ie gv fields are in fact towns or villages taken over for the purpose of acting as a hub for vehicle activity. Again historically correct... Cross roads were vigorously defended and such logistic junctions very often had towns or villages with them that provided local resources for troops an vehicles. Again even when limited to gv activity locally the terrain is enhanced for better gameplay.
Going beyond this into wish list territory.
Indeed you could go to the extreme of making every town a gv field and many such towns linked to " local" airfields like fleets are linked to ports.
Now every town is its own viable point of gv defence or origin of gv attack. Gv spawns are between towns and or ports ( like roads) never to airfields except when the two are linked as above.( one spawn from the associated town to its linked airfield)
Then all towns can be captured from air, land or sea. They are defacto vehicle fields. Ports would look very similar. With associated town buildings. Ports would be linked to Cv's as they are now, some towns are linked to local airfields which are abandoned as the town is lost then acquired 5 minutes later by the capturing side.
Good Morning,
Again, just waxing out loud here - kicking out ideas, nothing set in stone.
In my head, the property lines / hedge rows would be more like sparse tree/shrub lines. Not like the current impassable hedges we have in the town now. :D
(snip)
As far as how hard it is to capture a base, we do have variables for the amount of town that has to be down in order to capture, which can be adjusted. :cool:
One idea was to have less town buildings for the medium / small /vehicle bases. Currently there is around 100 buildings in the town, which is what I was planning on for the large airfield. So maybe have 75 for the medium field, 50 for the small field, and 35-40 for the vehicle base. :D That would set up hierarchy of difficulty on capturing fields, which is something I'm not sure we would want to do. :airplane:
(snip)
Another thought I had, is for base capture. if all auto ack / manned guns would have to be down, or just town guns. For this layout, I'm leaning towards town building only having to be down for capture. If you can get a goon or m3 in, and you or your troops don't die in the crossfire, you sir, deserve a medal. We'll have to discuss that one. :rock
First thing that came to my mind while looking at that pic: "TROOPS STILL WAITING @A4! Get the %&%$ town down!" :furious
...the northern border of Grafton Underwood airfield as compared to the center south spawn. (hehe, you must have known someone would recognize it, right?).
I wouldn't mind adding single airstrip, maybe tucked away in the woods somewhere, for the vehicle bases. They need one for the Fi 156, and if need be by the map maker, they could spawn the ju87g, il2, hurri2d tank killers. Maybe just have one or two ordnance bunkers near the airstrip. Plus it would make a good place for wounded birds to land if you can't reach a friendly main airfield.
i'm thoroughly confused on what is good for the game.. the game is fun..
Good Morning,
Again, just waxing out loud here - kicking out ideas, nothing set in stone.
In my head, the property lines / hedge rows would be more like sparse tree/shrub lines. Not like the current impassable hedges we have in the town now.
In regards to the spawns being not equal in distance to the map-room, I think that's really a moot issue, as currently it's the same way in game. You can spawn into a base from one way and be right on top of town, and some you have to drive over and across the airfield to get to town. It all depends on the luck of the draw on your countries spawn into a base when you're attacking a certain field.
As far as how hard it is to capture a base, we do have variables for the amount of town that has to be down in order to capture, which can be adjusted.
>One idea was to have less town buildings for the medium / small /vehicle bases. Currently there is around 100 buildings in the town, which is what I was planning on for the large airfield. So maybe have 75 for the medium field, 50 for the small field, and 35-40 for the vehicle base. That would set up hierarchy of difficulty on capturing fields, which is something I'm not sure we would want to do.<
We're still in discussion on how to do the road / rail system, So I really have no clue how that's going to turnout. The supply depot on the drawing was an idea on where to have the supply convoys terminate.
I'll tag this one as wishlist:
One thing I would like to see done in regards to base supply would be to have a large rail yard / distribution center for a zone of bases. Trains would leave the city for the distribution centers, then convoys would truck supplies from the distribution centers to the airfields. Destroying / damaging the Distribution center would slow down the resupply to the bases it supplies. If you kill a destroy a train heading to a distribution center, you would hinder the supply time for all of the bases that are supplied by that distribution center, as well as the rebuild time of the distribution center. Destroy a convoy and you hinder the supply to the field it was traveling to. This would make distribution centers and trains regional targets that need to be protected. I would also like to see dots for trains / convoys on the clipboard map when you have them enabled. Or maybe once a friendly gets within a certain range of train/convoy, it would show up as a dot for a period of time.
Another thought I had, is for base capture. if all auto ack / manned guns would have to be down, or just town guns. For this layout, I'm leaning towards town building only having to be down for capture. If you can get a goon or m3 in, and you or your troops don't die in the crossfire, you sir, deserve a medal. We'll have to discuss that one.
Like I said before, just kicking out ideas - nothing set in stone.
...I'll tag this one as wishlist:
One thing I would like to see done in regards to base supply would be to have a large rail yard / distribution center for a zone of bases. Trains would leave the city for the distribution centers, then convoys would truck supplies from the distribution centers to the airfields. Destroying / damaging the Distribution center would slow down the resupply to the bases it supplies. If you kill a destroy a train heading to a distribution center, you would hinder the supply time for all of the bases that are supplied by that distribution center, as well as the rebuild time of the distribution center. Destroy a convoy and you hinder the supply to the field it was traveling to. This would make distribution centers and trains regional targets that need to be protected. I would also like to see dots for trains / convoys on the clipboard map when you have them enabled. Or maybe once a friendly gets within a certain range of train/convoy, it would show up as a dot for a period of time...
:aok I love this idea.
Being able to attack supply centers, and disrupt the delivery of supplies within zones, will create a whole new set of possibilities for tactical strikes.
With the new terrain in development, we're also kicking around ideas for airfeild layouts, ect....
I've attached a rough layout of a 4 mile by 4 mile "base" area. This one contains a large airfeild, vehicle complex, surrounding town, and possible supply depot.
Legend:
Dark green is forest / woods
Red lines are hedge / property lines
brown lines - dirt roads
Blue/White circles - town buildings
Yellow dots - supply depot?
Everything else is pretty much labelled.
The basic premise of going this way is to create a detailed centralized game area where most of the fighting takes place, which is normally within one to two miles of a base /town. We anticipate having a higher resolution elevations in these areas which will lend to more gentle hills /slopes and be very conducive for vehicle fights. Also it will allow us to alleviate some of the issues with taking off in heavy bombers, in which there will be longer runways, and clear paths for climb out.
Also, We would have different layouts for each type of base. So there would be more variance in towns/facility layouts, as well as strategies for base capture. Also, we just think that it looks more natural that a square mile airfield, with a square mile town next to it.
I just wanted to post this to you guys and get some feedback about it. It's still in very early planning stages, so the sky's not falling yet. :)
I wouldn't mind adding single airstrip, maybe tucked away in the woods somewhere, for the vehicle bases. They need one for the Fi 156, and if need be by the map maker, they could spawn the ju87g, il2, hurri2d tank killers. Maybe just have one or two ordnance bunkers near the airstrip. Plus it would make a good place for wounded birds to land if you can't reach a friendly main airfield.
Make the base capture at least 50% easier to capture than it is now,( reduce town size, eliminate some acks, 2 VHS are plenty at Vbases not 4 and downtime(town) without Ninja m3s resup option 30 min);
Also, We would have different layouts for each type of base. So there would be more variance in towns/facility layouts, as well as strategies for base capture.
Look's good so far Waf, BUT STILL WANT A WINTER MAPI think that would be cool but it will never happen. One time there was a desert map in the MA and people FLIPPED THE F OUT! All because of the color of the terrain. People would say that the color was actually causing them physical pain, I'm not kidding. And numbers dropped when ever that terrain was in the MA so it was taken out of rotation. I may be mistaken but I think they just changed the terrain textures to green and put it back in rotation. Never underestimate the democratic power of stupidity.
I think that would be cool but it will never happen.I think you might be wrong ,their was alluding to by HiTech about having different session maps.
I think that would be cool but it will never happen. One time there was a desert map in the MA and people FLIPPED THE F OUT! All because of the color of the terrain. People would say that the color was actually causing them physical pain, I'm not kidding. And numbers dropped when ever that terrain was in the MA so it was taken out of rotation. I may be mistaken but I think they just changed the terrain textures to green and put it back in rotation. Never underestimate the democratic power of stupidity.
Yeah but they voted with their feet. That's why we don't have night time and that's why we don't have MA terrains that aren't green.
The current stuff I am working on has a 660 Foot vertex res, AH currently has 2480 res. I doubt will will go denser then this.
The new system has 16 + 4 base texture types the 16 are base types like rock grass snow ext..
HiTech
People did FLIP THE F OUT. The numbers did drop, and the map is no longer in rotation. The terrain files got lost despite being downloaded by thousands of players.Well now that your using caps and the letter F you have convinced me. :D
Well now that your using caps and the letter F you have convinced me. :DDid you have doubt?
I don't understand what you're trying to say in this post.
People did FLIP THE F OUT.
The numbers did drop,
and the map is no longer in rotation. The terrain files got lost despite being downloaded by thousands of players.
No they didn't..... wheres Lusche when you need him!
IIRC the Pizza map got deleted when the last big terrain change was implemented. As it used custom textures these would have to be redone by the map designer to the current terrain format and for whatever reason this was not done.
No they didn'tOk so they didn't take it out of rotation, they "lost" it. lol
No they didn't..... wheres Lusche when you need him!
Here you show that you don't know what your talking about. When building a map there are a number of source files that are compiled to create the RES file for the terrain. The source file are the ones that were lost and so the tiles could not be updated and so it could not be compiled and made into a RES file that could be used by the game.
My personal favorite manual: FM 20.15 Tents and Tent Pitching. :lol
| (http://www.ozatwar.com/locations/campseabee02.jpg) | Nothing so much to do with the tents (although the bumps on the racetrack grounds are tent camps). Mostly, I thought it resembled somewhat Waffle's vision for new fields. Also, I thought my Aussie friends in AH should have a field of their own (Camp Doomben, Queensland, Australia). |
We had desert maps in WBs. Nobody ever complained...
Maybe you should go back to warbi... Oh right, you can. :rofl
Fixed !
I was here in 2008. I left and came back. If Warbirds was viable I would still be THERE. HTC won by default being the last of the Mohicans....
Warbirds already did this. When I started there it had better numbers than AH has now. Less than a decade later it is effectively gone. That which has been is that which shall be...
My personal favorite manual: FM 20.15 Tents and Tent Pitching. :lol
they wrote a manual for that........ I pitch a tent every mourning and I've never used a manual....well :noid
:salute
"mourning" .... Freudian?
Waffle, another thing that came to my mind is can we do something about bomb craters. Today we can take off a field that has bomb crater and not damage our plane. Why can't the bomb craters stay up for 10-15 min and anything that hits thoughs crater depending how fast your going will take damage or even kill yourself. The bomber is then awarded the points. See the logic of one plane dropping lots of 100-250 lb bombs down a runway to shut it down.+1
I think this will add some historical value to dropping ords on a runway.
Just a dream of mine. :salute
That is how bomb craters used to work in AH. It was horrible as one guy could put bombs in each spawn area and effectively shut down the field.
A HUGE -1 to that
That is how bomb craters used to work in AH. It was horrible as one guy could put bombs in each spawn area and effectively shut down the field.
A HUGE -1 to that
Waffle, another thing that came to my mind is can we do something about bomb craters. Today we can take off a field that has bomb crater and not damage our plane. Why can't the bomb craters stay up for 10-15 min and anything that hits thoughs crater depending how fast your going will take damage or even kill yourself. The bomber is then awarded the points. See the logic of one plane dropping lots of 100-250 lb bombs down a runway to shut it down.This is not historical. Not WWII at least.
I think this will add some historical value to dropping ords on a runway.
This is not historical. Not WWII at least.
You can always take off out of the hanger
No, that what he is saying. 2 LAs with their small bomb load.... or any fighter that can carry 3 bombs, would be able to shut down a small field completely. 1 bomb at each end and a bomb on the spawn hanger. Your fighters would be damaged just spawning to take off.so harden the spawn points but leave the rest of the runway soft for bomb craters
Large and Med airfields would be harder but it would still be easier then putting 3000 into each FH.
Vulchers would have it easy too, a few small bombs after a rocket de-ack and now the targets can only spawn at one point, tasty.
so harden the spawn points but leave the rest of the runway soft for bomb craters:aok
Waffle, another thing that came to my mind is can we do something about bomb craters. Today we can take off a field that has bomb crater and not damage our plane. Why can't the bomb craters stay up for 10-15 min and anything that hits thoughs crater depending how fast your going will take damage or even kill yourself. The bomber is then awarded the points. See the logic of one plane dropping lots of 100-250 lb bombs down a runway to shut it down.
I think this will add some historical value to dropping ords on a runway.
Just a dream of mine. :salute
And I would follow with a HUGE +1 because it makes the game more difficult. Bring it.
No, that what he is saying. 2 LAs with their small bomb load.... or any fighter that can carry 3 bombs, would be able to shut down a small field completely. 1 bomb at each end and a bomb on the spawn hanger. Your fighters would be damaged just spawning to take off.He's right. It's not speculation, it's experience. The instant you spawn you hear CLANG CLANG CLANG and find yourself sitting in a crater in a broken plane on an otherwise intact airfield that is now useless because aeroplane spawn points are now by far the easiest and most obvious porkable strat objects.
Large and Med airfields would be harder but it would still be easier then putting 3000 into each FH.
Vulchers would have it easy too, a few small bombs after a rocket de-ack and now the targets can only spawn at one point, tasty.
So make it if 100,000 lb is dropped on the runway it will be shut down for 20 min.
So make it if 100,000 lb is dropped on the runway it will be shut down for 20 min.
Tinkles that just makes the concrete graphic texture of the runway disappear, doesn't make anything unusable. Wrong. The runway would disappear until the downtime is up. Without going in and looking I believe the downtime for a runway is less than a second by default, just in case.
Man there is so much that so many players don't know about AH. I should write a book, "So You Want to be Like Me".Yes, please enlighten the mindless masses with all of your AH experience. We look forward to it.
has anyone actually destroyed a runway in game? 125k damage i think was posted in this thread... But what happens then? What message is generated to the pilot - unable to fly your plane from this field due to runway destruction?I haven't seen it since I used to make terrains back in AH1 but all that happens is that the concrete disappears, it doesn't affect spawning or taking off and landing.
Just curious how the game handles a "destroyed" runway. :uhoh
I think moving the field away from the town while being a bit more realistic would help moving the fight away from the field, but is a 4 mile square big enough to do that?:O look at all the ack
(http://i266.photobucket.com/albums/ii253/maddogjoe_photos/4x4milelargeairfeild-2_zpsb6061b91.jpg) (http://s266.photobucket.com/user/maddogjoe_photos/media/4x4milelargeairfeild-2_zpsb6061b91.jpg.html)
Would an 8 mile tile be better?
I also think 4 radar antennas would be better as well. HTC already has a system in place for losing "parts" of a commodity like ammo and fuel, adding radar to that system might not be too tough.
I said the runway disappears and you come back with. "Wrong, the runway disappears!" :headscratch:
Those WW2 Surplus pup tents were terrible in the rain. I woke up more than once laying in a sleeping bag full of water. It didn't matter if it was on a hill with a good trench moat, we got soaked. Touch the canvas and you'd better have a pan ready to catch the water.
:cry
Even with a good water proofing chemical, I wouldn't waste a match setting one on fire.
Good Morning,
Again, just waxing out loud here - kicking out ideas, nothing set in stone.
We're still in discussion on how to do the road / rail system, So I really have no clue how that's going to turnout. The supply depot on the drawing was an idea on where to have the supply convoys terminate.
I'll tag this one as wishlist:
One thing I would like to see done in regards to base supply would be to have a large rail yard / distribution center for a zone of bases. Trains would leave the city for the distribution centers, then convoys would truck supplies from the distribution centers to the airfields. Destroying / damaging the Distribution center would slow down the resupply to the bases it supplies. If you kill a destroy a train heading to a distribution center, you would hinder the supply time for all of the bases that are supplied by that distribution center, as well as the rebuild time of the distribution center. Destroy a convoy and you hinder the supply to the field it was traveling to. This would make distribution centers and trains regional targets that need to be protected. I would also like to see dots for trains / convoys on the clipboard map when you have them enabled. Or maybe once a friendly gets within a certain range of train/convoy, it would show up as a dot for a period of time.
Like I said before, just kicking out ideas - nothing set in stone.
Was just wondering if anyone had any layout / maps of any military complexes that could be used as a vehicle bases / supply depots. Also any Nationality/Theater of Airfields. I Have "The Might Eighth War Manual" that has airfield layouts, so I don't need those. Any Pacific pacific fields, German bases, ect... would be helpful. I'm probably going to be starting on these mid next week.
Thanks,
Waffle
Leave it to lyric to be on the ball! WOOO! :rock
Was just wondering if anyone had any layout / maps of any military complexes that could be used as a vehicle bases / supply depots. Also any Nationality/Theater of Airfields. I Have "The Might Eighth War Manual" that has airfield layouts, so I don't need those. Any Pacific pacific fields, German bases, ect... would be helpful. I'm probably going to be starting on these mid next week.
Thanks,
Waffle
So does this mean that the new airfields are going to have names and not just numbers?That'd be sort of cool :aok
Since dying is what we do most, we should have a cemetery in the new town.
more difficult for who? certainly not the buff driver.i think it would be more diffecult<---cant't spell--for the computer to keep track of who gets credit for which crater kills somebody-esp if you get 2 or 3 diff players or more dropping on same runway or spawn
just sounds like "I want an easier way to shut down a field, hitting hangars with easymode bomb sights is too hard"
I like it.hehe i land on the grass and run to runway anyway.esp if trying to get to rearm pad fast
I would also like to see some fields that don't have concrete, that do have grass or depending on locale, dirt, or pierced steel planking for bases that are less developed, closer to front lines, or forward air strips.
can you imagine the opportunities for witty little sayings/easter eggs in a cemetery? :devil
(http://i343.photobucket.com/albums/o460/caldera_08/ft.jpg~original) (http://s343.photobucket.com/user/caldera_08/media/ft.jpg.html)
:neener:
(http://i343.photobucket.com/albums/o460/caldera_08/ft.jpg~original) (http://s343.photobucket.com/user/caldera_08/media/ft.jpg.html)
:neener:
(http://i343.photobucket.com/albums/o460/caldera_08/ft.jpg~original) (http://s343.photobucket.com/user/caldera_08/media/ft.jpg.html)
Waffle i have only one suggestion . On one of the airfields . Have a layout that can be used like an obstacle course for planes. Rows of taller structures to fly between with open hangers to fly through. It would be nice to have a place where a person could work on precise control of their plane.
Was just wondering if anyone had any layout / maps of any military complexes that could be used as a vehicle bases / supply depots. Also any Nationality/Theater of Airfields. I Have "The Might Eighth War Manual" that has airfield layouts, so I don't need those. Any Pacific pacific fields, German bases, ect... would be helpful. I'm probably going to be starting on these mid next week.
Thanks,
Waffle