PDA

View Full Version : Jets/Planes(air combat and control)



Nicorius
04-03-2009, 01:44 PM
Ok in Endwar the most air units you were given were helicopters then you could call in off map airstrikes.

In ruse we should get airfeilds or be able to call in planes (bombers,fighters scout planes) and also jets from off map.

Control of the air should be vital or else one side will be able to bomb all the opposing side (germanies) forces.

For example the battle of the bulge was one of the more well known battles for the end of the war.

One of the only reasons that it was capable of being launched by the Germans was because of the wheater there were no allied planes for a while that allowed the german units to move in undetected.

So controlling the air should be vital to the succes of either side.

Or else they will bomb and machine gun all the units of the side without air power and that will make the game to one sided in favour of the allies.

So what do you think about air control and combat.

Nicorius
04-03-2009, 01:44 PM
Ok in Endwar the most air units you were given were helicopters then you could call in off map airstrikes.

In ruse we should get airfeilds or be able to call in planes (bombers,fighters scout planes) and also jets from off map.

Control of the air should be vital or else one side will be able to bomb all the opposing side (germanies) forces.

For example the battle of the bulge was one of the more well known battles for the end of the war.

One of the only reasons that it was capable of being launched by the Germans was because of the wheater there were no allied planes for a while that allowed the german units to move in undetected.

So controlling the air should be vital to the succes of either side.

Or else they will bomb and machine gun all the units of the side without air power and that will make the game to one sided in favour of the allies.

So what do you think about air control and combat.

Mencor
04-03-2009, 02:38 PM
There is gameplay videos these show that bombers are ingame. And it has been said that going for air power early in the game is an option. I don't think there will be much off map support, though. I do belive in air power and i hope there is a few muniton types to choose from, there were some nasty stuff used in the war after all.

FrontlinerDelta
04-05-2009, 01:34 AM
I prefer to have all units on the battle field so I can use mass airstrikes if I have properly prepared for it. Like in Supreme Commander (which this is very similar too) you could go for mass bombers or whatever you wanted. It gives you more control of your strategy and it is really neat to have a giant enemy column coming towards you but a million (ok maybe not QUITE that many) bombers fly overhead and destroy everything.

Air power should be key but since this is WWII it should be more for disruption (bombing cities, paratrooper/commando raids) then close air support as that was generally very dangerous (hard to tell who is who).

KZarr
04-05-2009, 10:36 AM
I think you might want to change the topic name as there were not jet's in WWII. But i agree that air power should be a very important point in the game.

Pieman13
04-05-2009, 10:57 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KZarr:
I think you might want to change the topic name as there were not jet's in WWII. But i agree that air power should be a very important point in the game. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
explain this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Me_262

Nicorius
04-05-2009, 01:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KZarr:
I think you might want to change the topic name as there were not jet's in WWII. But i agree that air power should be a very important point in the game. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually there were jets maybe Yyou shoud watch militar channel somtime http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Inquisitor_Zeal
04-05-2009, 01:44 PM
Yes there were but they were not used in huge numbers like propellor planes

Pieman13
04-05-2009, 02:13 PM
still....they are awesome http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Nicorius
04-05-2009, 05:10 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Inquisitor_Zeal:
Yes there were but they were not used in huge numbers like propellor planes </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

German Superweapon perhaps?

Winbyone
04-05-2009, 11:25 PM
Jets saw combat near the very end of the war but thanks mostly to Hitler's interference in the Luftwaffe's Jet Project they were never very effective in combat. (Hitler wanted Jet Bombers instead of Jet fighters but the plane they had spent years building was designed as a fighter, Hitler ordered it anyway and the Jet Bombers couldn't carry much and what they were carrying did them no good in a dog fight.) I'm putting my money on no jet's in RUSE.

Pr3dzz_
04-06-2009, 02:34 AM
well one of them did get used as a jet fighter in the end, but it got shot down. if hitler didnt interfere those jets coulda stoped the bombings on Germany.

Nicorius
04-09-2009, 01:49 PM
Looky looky at the first screenshot on the ubi ruse page

http://ruse.us.ubi.com/#/screenshots

Messerchmits

Winbyone
04-09-2009, 03:34 PM
Thats not a jet...

Nicorius
04-09-2009, 04:44 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Winbyone:
Thats not a jet... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The first screenshot on the page screenshots is a jet the one thats engulfed in flame.

Winbyone
04-09-2009, 11:02 PM
No...it has a prop on each wing...Jet engines didn't look like that back then anyways if you think its not a prop cause you cant see the fins spinning in a relatively early screen shot... definitely not a jet...

DNAz5646
04-10-2009, 12:12 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Nicorius:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Winbyone:
Thats not a jet... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The first screenshot on the page screenshots is a jet the one thats engulfed in flame. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Messerschmitt Me 210 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Me_210)

DNAz5646
04-10-2009, 12:16 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Nicorius:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Winbyone:
Thats not a jet... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The first screenshot on the page screenshots is a jet the one thats engulfed in flame. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Messerschmitt Me 210 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Me_210)

irregular
04-10-2009, 01:00 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by FrontlinerDelta:
I prefer to have all units on the battle field so I can use mass airstrikes if I have properly prepared for it. Like in Supreme Commander (which this is very similar too) you could go for mass bombers or whatever you wanted. It gives you more control of your strategy and it is really neat to have a giant enemy column coming towards you but a million (ok maybe not QUITE that many) bombers fly overhead and destroy everything.

Air power should be key but since this is WWII it should be more for disruption (bombing cities, paratrooper/commando raids) then close air support as that was generally very dangerous (hard to tell who is who). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


I completely agree. I know Act of War focused more on airpower being off map support, but I didn't really like that. I like the Supreme Commander style of it like Frontliner pointed out.

Nicorius
04-10-2009, 01:26 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DNAz5646:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Nicorius:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Winbyone:
Thats not a jet... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The first screenshot on the page screenshots is a jet the one thats engulfed in flame. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Messerschmitt Me 210 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Me_210) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


So is it a jet or not


theres no proppeler

DNAz5646
04-10-2009, 04:01 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Winbyone:
No...it has a prop on each wing...Jet engines didn't look like that back then anyways if you think its not a prop cause you cant see the fins spinning in a relatively early screen shot... definitely not a jet... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Winbyone
04-10-2009, 06:28 PM
There is a prop on each wing...you can't see it because it is still spinning the way props tend to do when attempting to keep an aircraft airborne...Prop= Not a Jet

Commander672
04-15-2009, 02:02 PM
Speaking of high tech airplanes will that rigged-up bomber from modern marvals be on? You know, the one that they rigged head-to-tail with explosives then tried to use radio to control?

obliviondoll
04-17-2009, 05:05 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pieman13:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KZarr:
I think you might want to change the topic name as there were not jet's in WWII. But i agree that air power should be a very important point in the game. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
explain this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L..._War_II_jet_aircraft (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_World_War_II_jet_aircraft) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Fixed that for you.

storm_seeker
04-17-2009, 10:41 AM
I'd like to see some air combat. Maybe dedicated air combat/dog fights.

Though it would be nice if it was more true to life. So you could call air support, but not have it magically appear in afew seconds (unless theres a airfield thats conveniently at the side of the battlefield AND for some reason not been already attacked by the enemy. . . ?)

Another idea would be a pre-planning screen before battle where it could be made available for certain missions but your limited to how many and when. The idea comes from the recent promo video in that an air strike is used to help take the beach. I'd then guess that once the beach has been taken it would be down to ground combat.

As cool as jets/missles are, i still think they should keep it true to life, tech like that wasn't in everyday warfare, niether were superweapons until the end of the war in Hiroshima.

IMO, everything is matter of opinion. won't be many people 100% happy with the game, but as long as it turns out good... i've never been a big fan of air combat in RTS - Maybe thats because i'm old skool. AoE/Settlers style.

Mencor
04-17-2009, 11:31 AM
Still think air support isn't (and shouldn't) be off map support. Air power should be built on map as well as ground units and ships.

As for supper weapons not being an everyday occurance, it comes down to what is considered superweapons. The citizens of london got quite used to the v-1's. The v-2 was hiden from the public and blamed on gas explosions to prevent mass panic, for a while.

Air combat was an essential part of WW2 and as such i think it would be a misstake to leave it out.

Nicorius
04-18-2009, 12:39 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mencor:
Still think air support isn't (and shouldn't) be off map support. Air power should be built on map as well as ground units and ships.

As for supper weapons not being an everyday occurance, it comes down to what is considered superweapons. The citizens of london got quite used to the v-1's. The v-2 was hiden from the public and blamed on gas explosions to prevent mass panic, for a while.

Air combat was an essential part of WW2 and as such i think it would be a misstake to leave it out. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Maybe we should get a v3

Mencor
04-20-2009, 01:52 AM
Seeing as the v-3 project never realy got up and running and it can't realy change targets after the city its aimed on is captured, I doubt we will see it in game. Its cannon stuck in a hill after all.

EsauWasRight
05-03-2009, 02:26 PM
the game should definetly have jet aircraft like the me262, maybe even the americans could get the F-86, and if theier are russians the mig 15 even thoough those are cold war

the aircraft in the screenshot is defnietly not a jet,
its some kind of light bomber like the Ju 88 but, it has a different siloete