Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: GRUNHERZ on January 20, 2003, 01:28:05 PM

Title: CV damage model could it be more extensive?
Post by: GRUNHERZ on January 20, 2003, 01:28:05 PM

What would people think of upping the total CV sinking bomb weight while introducing progressive damage like fuel, ammo, plane selection and AAA fire loss?

Title: CV damage model could it be more extensive?
Post by: vorticon on January 20, 2003, 01:31:40 PM

it could be but why???

Title: CV damage model could it be more extensive?
Post by: Revvin on January 20, 2003, 01:32:40 PM

I'd rather it stay the way it is especially when some players delight in hiding the CV's

Title: Re: CV damage model could it be more extensive?
Post by: Sabre on January 20, 2003, 01:57:03 PM

Quote

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
What would people think of upping the total CV sinking bomb weight while introducing progressive damage like fuel, ammo, plane selection and AAA fire loss?

With ya, Grunny ol' buddy.  I've been campaigning for this for years.  I'd also like direct helm and engine control, the ability to select the formation (i.e. line-abreast, line-astern, etc.), fire-control moved up to the fire-direction towers (with multiple guns linked in to a single direction/range finder), as well as fire and flooding from damage.  Instead of relying on some abstract bomb-weight counter to determine if the ship goes down, actually give ships a damage model that takes into account where the bomb hits as well as how big and what kind of bomb (HE vs AP for example).  Oh, and I want the option of firing at least one of the DE's main guns, not just the AAA guns.  Hey, I can dream, can't I?

Title: CV damage model could it be more extensive?
Post by: DarkHawk on January 20, 2003, 02:31:58 PM

Sabre
IF we could get all listed in your request then a map of the pacific with may island and fleets. What a navy war we could have,

< S >

DarkHawk

Title: CV damage model could it be more extensive?
Post by: SpinDoc1 on January 20, 2003, 11:48:50 PM

Sabre has many interesting points. Even if we only got the progressive damage model, or the ability to control the speed or whether the ship moves at all! I would love to see progressive and localized damage. Man, the burning decks would be a site to behold!

Title: CV damage model could it be more extensive?
Post by: mjolnir on January 21, 2003, 04:32:07 AM

The burning decks would be nice eye candy, but not much different from a burning hangar.  After a couple minutes, you stop paying attention to it.  The idea of progressive damage does have its appeal though.  If it currently takes 8k worth of bombs to sink the CV, then shouldn't the fuel or the ack or at least the ordinance be disabled after 4-5k worth of bombs have hit it?  I don't need to see holes in the sides of the ship and the deck listing at a weird angle, I'd just like to see the hogs and zeros only able to up with 25% gas and no bombs.

Leads to an interesting point about troops.  You have to get the CV pretty close for the LVTs to spawn near the shoreline, but at the same time you don't want to get too close because if the troops get disabled, it's all in vain....wow, people might actually have to protect the fleets!  What a concept!

Title: CV damage model could it be more extensive?
Post by: rickod on January 21, 2003, 12:45:49 PM

it shouldnt be too hard to get the ship to list from flooding if say one torpedo hits
If I recall correctly this game uses hit boxes as part of the damage model why not do this with the ships

take a few bombs/torps/bullets to one side start flooding and listing