PDA

View Full Version : Wouldn't it be GREAT if u could destroy airfields!



Col_Tibbetts
02-08-2004, 02:21 PM
Think about it. Your runway gets cratered and you can't take off anymore. Now you lose and the map resets. They would have to do something to prevent taking off in the grass but that wouldnt be hard. Make the grass extra bumpy or something like a landing gears worst nightmare.

People would fly CAP. People would attack targets instead of constant T&B fights! People would fight for what is right!

And don't tell me that scripted servers already provide such objectives. I have been on many scripted servers where no one ever attacks the ground targets. The game lasts for hours while people turn and burn even though a little mud moving would win the game.

People would defend an airfield since if it was destroyed then they couldn't take off.

Food for thought.

Col. Tibbetts

Col_Tibbetts
02-08-2004, 02:21 PM
Think about it. Your runway gets cratered and you can't take off anymore. Now you lose and the map resets. They would have to do something to prevent taking off in the grass but that wouldnt be hard. Make the grass extra bumpy or something like a landing gears worst nightmare.

People would fly CAP. People would attack targets instead of constant T&B fights! People would fight for what is right!

And don't tell me that scripted servers already provide such objectives. I have been on many scripted servers where no one ever attacks the ground targets. The game lasts for hours while people turn and burn even though a little mud moving would win the game.

People would defend an airfield since if it was destroyed then they couldn't take off.

Food for thought.

Col. Tibbetts

maverick7614
02-08-2004, 04:11 PM
Excelent suggestion, but wouldnt people start moaning about vulchers and what not. Also would you use just a small (12.5Kg-500Kg)bomb to destroy the airfields or what?

http://aa.1asphost.com/Niklamort/06022004/Hard-day-over-berlin.JPG

LeadSpitter_
02-08-2004, 04:17 PM
yeah, maybe destroying all buildings and damaging sections of the runway would place a territory mark on it when all targets are hit shutting down the runway.

We need more gametypes

http://www.geocities.com/leadspittersig/LSIG.txt
VIEW MY PAINTSCHEMES HERE (http://www.il2skins.com/?planeidfilter=all&planefamilyfilter=all&screenshotfilter=allskins&countryidfilter=all&authoridfilter=%3ALeadspitter%3A&historicalidfilter=all&Submit=+++Apply+filters++&action=list&ts=1072257400)

woofiedog
02-08-2004, 04:59 PM
Yes,
I like to wait for the enemy too fly back to their base low on fuel then attack! Or after they landed strafe the Hec out of them, but now the aircraft dissapper and the bomb craters {They always have} fix themselfs.
It would be great too be able to rearm and fuel up and go back at it in the same mission with the damage caused remaining or number of aircraft remaining left to carry on. The Enemy or ourselfs having too move to another base if the damage got too bad for flight operations at that base.

A.K.Davis
02-08-2004, 05:00 PM
Since you can take-off without the runways, it wouldn't be particularly effective, although it would funny as hell watching someone drive into a crater.

--AKD

http://www.flyingpug.com/pugline2.jpg

woofiedog
02-08-2004, 05:06 PM
Yes http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

woofiedog
02-08-2004, 05:11 PM
You can use the grass strips or fields by the airbases, but bombers have a tough time taking off on grass or dirt. Also if we had some kind of refueling or rearming system we would have to use the bases to do so.

WarGod5475
02-08-2004, 06:41 PM
even if in every crater thier was placed an object on the ground so that it would rip of landing gear.

you wouldnt need to make the base be not useable cause if you had enough craters all around the spawn points they would move to the next base by choice. because everytime they apear they couldnt get to the runway to take off without loosing gear...
s0 your war could progress normally...

so if anyone can figure out how to make the craters leave obsticals or invisible obsticals on the field that would be all you need...

adlabs6
02-08-2004, 07:22 PM
This would be nice for dynamic campaigns. An interesting addition, but unlikely.

http://www.geocities.com/adlabs6/B/bin/sigUBI.GIF
My FB/FS2004 Pages (http://www.geocities.com/adlabs6/B/) | IL2skins (http://www.il2skins.com) | OMEGASQUADRON (http://777avg.com/omegasquad/)

HellToupee
02-08-2004, 07:59 PM
heh be a bit like the scripted servers with a me262 base, most of the axis where at this base and their was an endless swarm of la7s overhead wreckin the place, no one botherd with the far off objectives. Airbases as objectives is alot more enjoyable.

http://lamppost.mine.nu/ahclan/files/sigs/spitwhiners1.jpg

JG7_Rall
02-08-2004, 08:01 PM
We could do that, but it might be more effective to have re arming and re fueling stations that we can bomb and destroy. This renders the airfield useless, and would be more tactical IMO. Plus, most people don't use the runways now anyways http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Inadaze
02-08-2004, 08:16 PM
A few years ago I took advantage of a temporary free offer for warbirds. A pay as you go online sim. They had a similar thing going and I must say it seemed to work pretty damned well.

To take out an airfield you had destroy all it's AAA and defences (which regenerate slowly) and get a ju52 loaded with paratroopers to the field, drop em and hope they can capture the control tower! The paras had little icons so people could strafe em down and if any airfield defences were working they would attack em too.

If the para's get to the tower. the field is captured and belongs to the other team.

It encouraged real co ordination of forces, both to attack and to defend.

I'd love to see something like this online. It gave a much better feeling of immersion to the game. And the teamwork got pretty good. Doing an attack in a squadron of 8 low level mossies is still one of my favourite online memories.

Or the joy of finding the enemies Ju52 all alone and ungaurded... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/icon_twisted.gif

I've played Il2 a little online, but soon tire of endless dogfights with no real aims. I've meant to play more Co op or Dynamic campaigns, but they never seem to drag me in in the same way.

still... mebe one day... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif~Inadaze

Steaky_361st
02-08-2004, 08:18 PM
Great idea...i second the motion

However that would take a lot of late nights @ 1C's Headquarters and a lot of carry out chinese food to get that done...

SodBuster43
02-08-2004, 11:02 PM
"ONLINE WAR" GAME TYPE

The following game type would be created in the full mission builder just like a cooperative mission would be created. The exception would be that there would always be two teams each with their own objectives. I should think that this might be feasible within the current game engine to do this. The following features would be incorporated into this game play mode:

-Players having the ability to create flights of up to four aircraft during the course of the battle. Aircraft would be drawn from a pool of available aircraft types determined by the map creator. Wingman commands and radio chatter would work just like in a cooperative type game. Also, the ability to jump from one aircraft in your flight to another until your entire flight has completed a sorte and landed or has been completely destroyed.

-Objectives for both teams would be predetermined by the map creator for balanced gameplay. Visible colored markers would indicate locations and types of objectives. Objectives could also appear during the progress of battle by setting the time for the objective later than the map start time. Destruction of airfileds would be possible merely by defining a "destroy ground" objective area around the airfield. The airfield could then change from a colored team designation to a white neutral designation.

-The map round would end when all objectives for one team were completed or all available aircraft were depleted.

This concept would be very similar to the scripted servers we have now but incorporated into the game as a third gametype option. Game rounds could last for hours or even days http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

[This message was edited by SodBuster43 on Sun February 08 2004 at 10:37 PM.]

F16_Petter
02-09-2004, 12:33 AM
I agree fully with Inadaze. Warbirds had a much more "designed" online play with more effort put behind it for obvious reasons (they make money on online playing)

I wish Oleg and 1C would implement these functions, and compete with these pay to play simulators by stealing their concept and making the money on more sales of game copies instead of the online pay to play concept. Im sure the only thing that is stopping wb3 players from flying IL2FB more often is the lack of immersion in online playing. And some sceneries/ theaters ofcourse. Here is my wishlist:

- Ability to capture terrain in online dogfights. A dynamic frontline.

- Ability to capture /Destroy airfields as done in WB3 with paras OR with mechanized or normal infantry forces. Destruction would also be able to achieve from the air ofcourse

- Bombing the tarmac/taxiway/runway would be devastating for aircraft operations. Craters that do DAMAGE instead of just being a texture.

- Ability to add (place) / remove airfields. As it is now, certain maps contain too many airfields! sometimes a map can contain 12 airfields, and its just a joke. Have you ever had the feeling looking at the kneepadmap and said.. oh there are bases just over the border, and lots of them? or bases that are neutral. (white) I mean come on.

Resource based dogfight scenario. Example:
Destroying fuel cisterns at bases or in industrial areas would limit fueling capacity at bases to maybe 25% (scalable)
Destroying factories, would inhibit use of aircraft etc etc

- Ability to fly cargoplanes like Ju52 / C47 for resource drops, resupply flights or paradrops.

- Ability to man AA guns? << This is doubtful, it would be great fun, but then again its a flightsim, not a AA sim. But hey.. an option for it??

- Scalable Refuel/Rearming/Field repair time function (from 30 seconds up to xx min for the realism hardcore fans) Pilots would rather switch planes than taking up the same aircraft if in a hurry. And the plane would be rearming refueling and be even visible on the tarmac with ground crew. (ok maybe too advanced? haha lets wait 10 years then)

And putting a aircraft inventory, with limited aircraft. The latest can be done with a workaround by scripting with FBD, but it feels like Maddox Games could have thought of this first. And they sure can do it better since they have the sourcecode. I dont claim to be an expert or so but would these simple functions make the game worse? IMO they would not. Maddox games has created an excellent simulator, but the online game concept or functions are stoneage. And I see no reason not to improve them?
If they are too busy working with other things, cant they ask the community for help? I am convinced there are many "free" resources available.

I truly hope some things will change for BoB. Or im gonna be sad.

Thank you.

out.

Zayets
02-09-2004, 02:09 AM
Yeah baby!Gimme sumthn' to bomb!

You guys talk only about online stuffs and as far as I remember everything in there (except for virtual wars) degenerate in a T&B contest.Nobody has a clue what objectives are and they look for the first enemy to engage it. Mission states He111 will bomb the hell outta base at C4 and Bf will provide escort. I take off with 3 Bf's IN THE SAME TIME and they go like hell looking for a good fight where tthey eventually get killed. As for my precious crate I end being attacked 5-10 minutes after T/O and end my journey with 2 smoking engines because those guys don't bother to read the briefings.
So,is for that I take it back offline. I preffer the stupid AI instead of human mates.Amazing,I always reached an objective when I was escorted by AI "stupid" planes.
And for the records , an average AI fighterjock is far better than many pilots venturing online. I say this looking how both behave.Don't gimme stuff like , yeah , but the opponents were AI's as well. Could be , they als are better than many jock online.
I have spoken!

Zayets out
http://server5.uploadit.org/files/Zayets-iar80pic.jpg

oFZo
02-09-2004, 05:11 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Zayets:
Yeah baby!Gimme sumthn' to bomb!

You guys talk only about online stuffs and as far as I remember everything in there (except for virtual wars) degenerate in a T&B contest.Nobody has a clue what objectives are and they look for the first enemy to engage it. Mission states He111 will bomb the hell outta base at C4 and Bf will provide escort. I take off with 3 Bf's IN THE SAME TIME and they go like hell looking for a good fight where tthey eventually get killed. As for my precious crate I end being attacked 5-10 minutes after T/O and end my journey with 2 smoking engines because those guys don't bother to read the briefings.
So,is for that I take it back offline. I preffer the stupid AI instead of human mates.Amazing,I always reached an objective when I was escorted by AI "stupid" planes.
And for the records , an average AI fighterjock is far better than many pilots venturing online. I say this looking how both behave.Don't gimme stuff like , yeah , but the opponents were AI's as well. Could be , they als are better than many jock online.
I have spoken!

Zayets out
http://server5.uploadit.org/files/Zayets-iar80pic.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree mate.

Once I won for my side on a scripted server just by torpedoing four ships within 25 minutes, while all the little fighterjockeys had been T&B-ing for an hour or so http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

-oFZo
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/paul.bryant3/ETSigHolland.gif
Founding member and Offical Keeper of The Herbs of the Eurotrolls.

"I have given you all the seed bearing plants and herbs to use." - The Bible

GT182
02-09-2004, 06:12 AM
You need to get with a group that works together in Coop Missions. Here's one that does that - Stab/Jagdgeschwader 51 (http://www.stabgeschwader51.com/Jg51main.html). Or drop in at the link at the bottom of my post and look for the Stab/Jagdgeschwader 51 forum at BA.

We are not a bunch of kids running willey nilley all over the place, we fly together and as a team, as much as we can at least. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

www.bombs-away.net (http://www.bombs-away.net)
"Fly to Survive, Survive to Fly"

GT182
02-09-2004, 07:21 AM
Here is a link to a thread I started in "Oleg's Readyroom" on the same subject.

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=63110913&m=466101281

"GT182" / "vonSpinmeister"
www.bombs-away.net (http://www.bombs-away.net)
"Fly to Survive, Survive to Fly"

mortoma
02-09-2004, 08:33 AM
Sorry Inadaze, Air Warrior had that kind of stuff years before Warbirds did. Where do you think Warbirds got it's ideas from??? I was helping to capture or defend airfields in Air Warrior as early as 1995. Warbirds wasn't even out then AFAIK.

BaldieJr
02-09-2004, 09:11 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Inadaze:
A few years ago I took advantage of a temporary free offer for warbirds. A pay as you go online sim. They had a similar thing going and I must say it seemed to work pretty damned well.

To take out an airfield you had destroy all it's AAA and defences (which regenerate slowly) and get a ju52 loaded with paratroopers to the field, drop em and hope they can capture the control tower! The paras had little icons so people could strafe em down and if any airfield defences were working they would attack em too.

If the para's get to the tower. the field is captured and belongs to the other team.

It encouraged real co ordination of forces, both to attack and to defend.

I'd love to see something like this online. It gave a much better feeling of immersion to the game. And the teamwork got pretty good. Doing an attack in a squadron of 8 low level mossies is still one of my favourite online memories.

Or the joy of finding the enemies Ju52 all alone and ungaurded... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/icon_twisted.gif

I've played Il2 a little online, but soon tire of endless dogfights with no real aims. I've meant to play more Co op or Dynamic campaigns, but they never seem to drag me in in the same way.

still... mebe one day... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif~Inadaze<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sold. How much?

Rather than try to match witless responses with the Usual Suspects, I think i'll look into this as my online fix.

We all know that FB will never take on a tactical feel as long as online-play offers the option of quake-play, so for me, the only real option is to look for a new outlet.

Like Zayets, I get my sim-fix by playing campaigns. For those few of us who like a bit of depth in our gaming, its the only real option. If I just want to turn endless loops, I'll get online in FB.

<pre class="ip-ubbcode-code-pre">
______ _____
(, / ) /) /) , (, /
/---( _ // _(/ _ / __ ,""""]
+----/ ____)(_(_(/_(_(__(__(/____/__/ (__--------,' /---+
| / ( / ,' NR / |
|(_/ ..-""``"'-._ (_/ __,' 42 _/ |
+-.-"" "-..,____________/7,.--"" __]-----+

</pre>

Tailspin2
02-09-2004, 09:40 AM
Mortoma,

Just a correction. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Warbirds was out in beta from June 1995. It went pay for play 1996.

I was in the open beta back starting back in June 1995. No paratroopers to capture fields, just planes at the that point.


Inadaze,

You will find this capture the airfield thing gets pretty boring also. I play WB for 5 years. Most times things generated into T&B fights anyway in the main arena. Basically no better than the current scripted dogfight server in FB. The Warbirds relief was the weekly scenarios where everyone flew a mission with a specific purpose. For FB, it is the online wars right now.

Tailspin's Tales
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/Tailspin/index.htm

Col_Tibbetts
02-09-2004, 09:45 AM
Great replies fellas. I wonder if a mod could move this to the Oleg Ready Room since I don't think Oleg reads the general forum anymore.

I wouldn't if I were him...http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Col. Tibbetts

Inadaze
02-09-2004, 10:42 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tailspin2:
Inadaze,

You will find this capture the airfield thing gets pretty boring also. I play WB for 5 years. Most times things generated into T&B fights anyway in the main arena. Basically no better than the current scripted dogfight server in FB. The Warbirds relief was the weekly scenarios where everyone flew a mission with a specific purpose. For FB, it is the online wars right now.

Tailspin's Tales
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/Tailspin/index.htm<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Tailspin I know what you mean. I played plenty of fruitless games of WB as well were it was full of nothing but fighters with no strategy apparent. Just loads of random dogfights. I don't think you can get around that problem as long as games are onlne.

But, it would be a nice option to be able to take out enemy airfields and stop them being useable http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif After all in a real war taking out the enemies ability to have air superiority is the main aim of any airforce.

I'll stick my neck out here. Because this stretches into the area of "vulching". Like Zayets said, most games with objectives dejenerate into people ignoring the aims and looking for dogfights. I've done it myself, I've been on maps where I feel I'm the only person trying to acomplish the objectives and everyone else is over an airfield miles away dogfighting for the sake of it. To be honest I get more out of playing an offline campaign than I do playing an online game which has gone like that.

But if the Airfields are valid targets. I.E. They can be put out of action, it does spur folk into trying to do something about it if its one of the objectives. It also takes away the "Vulching" problem because it positvely makes it mandatory if you want to win (or survive). (And, thinking about it, if you capture an airfield deep in enemy territory, it would encourage more ground attack to stop the artillery shelling ya on take off or infantry and tanks recapturing the field...)

I started playing Warbirds when you had to land on an enemy airfield after the defences had been destroyed to capture it and stopped shortly after the Paras had been introduced.

I'm thinking of getting into some online co-ops or joining a squad. You're right that that type of game is already out there. But it would be a cool if the airfields thng could be introduced somehow.

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Salute, Tally Ho and that http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif~Inadaze

adlabs6
02-09-2004, 12:11 PM
Yes, I too have won the online script objectives while others seemed not to care. When scripting first was released, such missions that had goals (other than "kill 59 fighters") were very common, but the last few times I took time to look, there weren't so many.

I honestly enjoyed those games as much or more than an AI campaign. Having mission goals was brilliant, I need them to have a reason to play. Back when scripts were new, I envisioned building a series of objective maps that could be played through by 10 or so players in 30 minutes or so each, for a total of say 4 or 5 maps over the course of an evening's play. I never saw such a setup, but some servers were well done.

Still, for now coops are all I care to do in FB anymore, or the odd DF with some forum pals. Playing those VFC coops several times in the last few days has really spoiled me to the point of not even finding interst in a DF server anymore.

Also, nice ideas here, I never played Warbirds, so I didn't see some of these before. I will hold out hope for BoB having these ideas, if they care to include them.

http://www.geocities.com/adlabs6/B/bin/sigUBI.GIF
My FB/FS2004 Pages (http://www.geocities.com/adlabs6/B/) | IL2skins (http://www.il2skins.com) | OMEGASQUADRON (http://777avg.com/omegasquad/)