PDA

View Full Version : How will spawning be arranged in PF?



1.JaVA_Razer
10-17-2004, 10:38 AM
I was thinking about the imminent release of PF and how fun mbattles we would have on line with carrier vs carrier.

But then it hit me, how will the landing/ take off be arranged? I'd hate to have someone "pop up" when i'm on the final for landing.

And will the carriers be mobile? because I think after seing pearl harbor( and noticing the B 25 thing) that a carrier lying still isn't so good for the people taking off because speed= life in a plane http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

so will the carriers move to give us a little helping hand while taking off or not?

1.JaVA_Razer
10-17-2004, 10:38 AM
I was thinking about the imminent release of PF and how fun mbattles we would have on line with carrier vs carrier.

But then it hit me, how will the landing/ take off be arranged? I'd hate to have someone "pop up" when i'm on the final for landing.

And will the carriers be mobile? because I think after seing pearl harbor( and noticing the B 25 thing) that a carrier lying still isn't so good for the people taking off because speed= life in a plane http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

so will the carriers move to give us a little helping hand while taking off or not?

JG7_Rall
10-17-2004, 12:10 PM
I hope people spawn on the sides or something with their wings folded instead of in the takeoff position...definitely would be annoying to be flairing and catch a corsair instead of a cable

Chuck_Older
10-17-2004, 12:13 PM
How about:

Unsinkable carriers in pairs

One on each team for launch
One on each team for retreival

steiner562
10-17-2004, 12:27 PM
BUMP for moveable carriers online/ingame would make things very intresting onlinehttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

1.JaVA_Razer
10-17-2004, 01:07 PM
yhea and also I think if carriers are dead in the water they can be torpedo'd much quikcer and also heavy bombers like the SBD will not be able to take off with bomb load I think.

back in the war they used to steer the ship into the wind to give more lift to the planes

Chuck_Older
10-17-2004, 02:00 PM
OK, let's backtrack a second here


You are all talking about Dogfight online play, right?

Seems that's the end all and be all for many players

In the digfight map, if a spawn point for one team was destroyed, that's that for the team, right? No more spawning from there.

So I have to beleive that SPAWN carriers in DF are unsinkable.

Why can't there be carriers that are spawn points and carriers that aren't, in DF?

It seems to me that the thinking is a little rigid on the subject. We're speculating, but c'mon, be creative. Perosnally, i see nothing wrong with two carrier types, take off and retreival. That solves your problem with other plnes taking off and landing. If they also can't be sunk, there's the solution for your torpedo problem. And lastly, this is a PC sim, I'm sure a little head wind can be simulated for stationary carriers in DF

Von_Zero
10-17-2004, 02:48 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> I'm sure a little head wind can be simulated for stationary carriers in DF <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
wouldn't that mean integrating an entirely new feature? "custom wind", to allow the mission creator to simulate the intensity and direction of the wind?
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Perosnally, i see nothing wrong with two carrier types, take off and retreival. That solves your problem with other plnes taking off and landing <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
so what if one of them is sinked?
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> If they also can't be sunk, there's the solution for your torpedo problem. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
that wouldn't also mean adding a new feature, something like "invulnerabilty" for ground objects? or at least carriers?


from here: http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=23110283&m=8141076922
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> In order to maintain better online synchronization we had to turn off client-side collision for parked planes that are using chocks. In all other cases collision works as usual. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
so unless two planes are taking-of or landing simultaneously, there shouldn't be any problems....

Chuck_Older
10-17-2004, 04:43 PM
No. That just means you're not willing to accept anything but what you see in FB right at this minute.

So many things in FB are scripted, why can't some extra lift be generated simply because you've taken off from a carrier? Because we don't have that feature right now? Why does "custom wind" come into play? Why does it have to be something the player worries about? Why can't it be a feature of my theoretical stationary Dogfight carrier? there's no provision in FB for taking of at anything but "ground" level right now, but you take it as a ggiven there will be no custom "height for takeoof" option in PF, so what's wrong with my scenario?

You're taking for granted at least as much as I am.

Tomislav
10-17-2004, 11:22 PM
Imagine the horror of 20 FNG's maxing their throttles at the same time on a carrier deck...Hope someone gets screens of those explosions! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

This is a problem for any sort of multiplayer missions (or the cooperative campaign?), so I am interested in how it will be resolved. Some people are, uhmmm, 'too enthusiastic' to bother to properly taxi onto the nice big runways we have now; I know the Essex-class was big for its day, but...

Skarphol
10-18-2004, 03:11 AM
I don't see this as a big problem, as I never have to land after meeting yuu gyus on a dogfight-map... I'll just float around in my inflatable waiting for a destroyer to pick me up..

Skarphol

TgD Thunderbolt56
10-18-2004, 07:45 AM
There are many questions to be answered in just a few days. Along with carrier ops, I'm very interested in the "craters" that will remain on the taxiway/runway. This in itself will add another whole dimension to FB:AEP not to mention PF.

TB

diomedes33
10-18-2004, 12:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Von_Zero:
so what if one of them is sinked?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Couldn't that be one of the triggers to end the map? Like when a main objective is reached for a scripted DF server.

I can't wait to see the guys that don't believe in runways and firewall the throttle in the parking lot try their antics on a carrier.

Von_Zero
10-18-2004, 12:38 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> quote:
Originally posted by Von_Zero:
so what if one of them is sinked?



Couldn't that be one of the triggers to end the map? Like when a main objective is reached for a scripted DF server. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
that is exactly my point, if we put 2 cariers and make them indestructible, there will be lots of fun lost...

VW-IceFire
10-18-2004, 12:57 PM
You could in theory have a second carrier to sink that isn't launching aircraft. There are ways around this.

Von_Zero
10-18-2004, 01:11 PM
let's say u takeoff from an island or a carrier, and meet 3 enemy carriers. two for takeoff& landing, the third as a target... how do u choose the target? wouldn't more important to sink the other carriers thus making the enemy's life more dificult?