Have no idea if this has been mentioned but i thought it would a great addition to the game to give it balance, especially in multiplayer.
If at the start of each game the host could pick how much each person is allowed to speand on their aeroplane it would make a much more balanced environment (i.e. if the host only allowed $200 million then a person would be able to buy the F22 but not put any missiles on it or maybe only rubbish ones, but someone who picks a eurofighter etc would be able to fully kit out their planes with the best of the best, you get my drift?)
This has been explained really badly, hopefully someone who understands this can reword it lol, but it seems like a good idea to me, it keeps the realistic aspect of the game but would also make using older planes viable
Balance ruins games. There *should* be a right tool for the job. I can't stand COD4 when you can have a silencer *or* a red dot sight. An F-22 should be better than an F-14.
The way to get them all used is to offer gametypes that have different objectives and give hosts options for limitations on aircraft and loadouts available---but not across the board limitations.
In OGF, we play with all F-16's, or a mix of A-10's and an F-16/18. We almost never use an F-22, simply because it isn't as fun. Give the host power to set up a "theme" for a match. Russian vs. US planes for instance, or no stealth, 2 bombers req'd for each team etc. and that takes care of it and adds gametypes.
Im not saying that planes should be standardised in any way or that you cant put anything on a plane, that would suck. It's just a type of different restriction for the host to put on, so people can still choose anything within their budget allowed so to speak but it means that people have to compromise between what plane they want to fly and what load out they want - i see your point tho, other option would just allow the host to turn planes on and off and achieve the same thing, but i just thought this would be a more flexible restriction.
wasnt thinking so much in terms of maintaining the craft, but perhaps this could play a role - for example the host might be able to set a series of deathmatches and you have to repair the damage your plane sustained or fly it as it was in next round?
Also if this is gonna be more like a arcade than a sim game i hope they include aracadish game types too (I'm just thinking from FFS games) like infection (one plane starts off "infected" and all the others are uninfected, if the infected plane shoots down an uninfected one they they join the infected team etc. until there is only one guy left). What does everyone feel about that?
yeah thats what i was thinking when i wrote it, maybe those who have too extensive damage e.g. complete destuction lol wouldnt be able to enter the next round - it would be kinda like a little tournament. By the end the players will be flying dustbins in the air tho lol!
the reason players will wait for HAWX is because they wnat to play an air combat game that different from AC/OGF. if HWAX is another AC/OGF,why all players just go back to play AC/OGF???
ubi should pick the market that the current games didn't cover,not compete the current market
why don't everyone check a look at the sucess of NDS/wii,isn't it a really good examply for discovering new markets??
did you play Blazing Angels or cod 4 ,ı think multi menu must be mix of these two games ; Blazing Angels for balance (aircraft type:early,middle,late sth.)
cod4 for rank.and when you start a game you can chose your own wepon from list,maybe we can chose our aircraft like so.On cod4 we can modify our wepon,maybe we can modify our aircraft like too.
Or without these,there is only classic mode deathmach and teamdeathmach's,but its not be enjoyable for long time.
Summarize;
when we enhance our skills with time,we develop our plane too.
