
Air Combat
#1
Posted 11 December 2002 - 05:41 PM
Kamikaze:
Your interceptor is out of ammo? Your weapons are crap? You don't have any weapons? KAMIKAZE! Destroys your interceptor but causes loads of damage, usually taking out the enemy ship...
Controlled Combat:
When you enter into air combat a mini-map opens up so you can control your fighters manually, haven't really thought of specifics, just an idea...
Modular Design:
Rather than simply having an interceptor which can be equiped with 2 guns, why not have an interceptor that has:
2 Weapon Slots
1 Engine Slot
1 Armour Slot
1 Shield Slot
1 Misc Slot
or something similar, that way instead of your interceptors becoming obsolete you can always upgrade the engines and add an extra fuel pod so they can still keep up with the enemy. Maybe normal interceptors can only handle certain engine types, the faster engines can only be fitted to Avengers.
Anyway, if anyone has ever played the game Stars! you will know exactly what I mean... ideally there would be a lot more craft types available for this idea to be best... should I bye an expensive new craft or should I upgrade my old stuff?
Maybe fitting new parts needs to be done in a workshop and needs some engineers free...
Bombs:
Fit your transport craft with bomb bays, bomb enemy bases to weaken their forces before you deploy your men...
Oh well, thats all I can think of for now, let me know what you think...
http://www.pringle.3lx.com/
(Redirct... The real addy is a japanese word but the auto-filter cocks it up...)
#2
Posted 12 December 2002 - 12:29 AM

And i agree with the modules, kinda like the way x-com: apocalypse was built. It gives more flexibility and realism to the game.
About the controlled air combat... I hope you're not thinking 3D coz I think that's gonna kill our programmers.
#3
Posted 12 December 2002 - 06:30 AM
The idea I was originally thinking of was a simplified version of the tactical interface; no terrain (maybe clouds that act like smoke screens), craft take up 4 squares like HWP, but if your using a troop carrier soldiers with flight suits could possibly get out to offer support. O:)
http://www.pringle.3lx.com/
(Redirct... The real addy is a japanese word but the auto-filter cocks it up...)
#4
Posted 25 January 2003 - 02:04 PM
#5
Guest_stewart_*
Posted 25 January 2003 - 02:56 PM
#6
Posted 25 January 2003 - 03:09 PM
You think every pilot wants to sacrifice their lives if someone orders
them to? I don't think so.
So that's why you have to add stats like morale, bravery, concentration, reflexes, pride etc.
If you don't then:
1. A rich player just sets up a base next to a existing one, containing only hangars to create interceptors with and uses this as a kamikaze defense all the time in a multi-game (I would do it

2. The same rich player (me

So if you use stats, the pilot will think twice before doing a risky action like kamikaze or bomb.
It balances the gameplay, and boosts game realism.
#7
Posted 25 January 2003 - 04:22 PM
as for modular craft: I definately agree; but we need to decide how modular they are to be. I don't think engines should be modular. Other than that, I agree with this stuff.
X-com interceptor was shoddily (is that a word?) made imo. It was fun, but I beat it in 2 days (literally, i opened the box one day and beat it the following day). Regardless, it was a great storyline, and actually takes place BEFORE the apocalypse timeline. (it was a prequel i guess...) There was no real depth to it though, it almost reached the arcade feel of Enforcer (which I hated by the way). I'd much rather see air combat go like apocalypse where they just have a FFA between all the ships involved (of course apocalypse had multiple ships come at once...). It would be cool to see a fusion ball launcher though. (small mushroom cloud appears on the horizon... I'd use that weapon just to watch that happen)
#8
Posted 31 January 2003 - 05:27 AM

The same thing is with armour - it is not possible to equip aircraft with better armour than interceptors initially have as long as we use terrestrial materials, because as you may read in ufopaedia interceptors use latest technology on earth. But in case we want to add armour to aircraft (probably from new alien material), as an engineer I may only tell you that that the aircraft would need to be completely rebuild.
We may eventually add armour slot this option for tanks (they be constructed to be more damage resistant with a new revolutionary material such as alien alloys), but I think that option would be rather obsolete.
And about kamikaze - I think that pilots can eject several seconds before crash

#9
Posted 31 January 2003 - 06:16 AM
as far as i know kamikaze does not include ejecting the pilot. why? coz that way the pilot can guide the plane where it hurts most with the best accuracyAnd about kamikaze - I think that pilots can eject several seconds before crash
and then craft can be guided remotely from a control tower.

#10
Posted 31 January 2003 - 12:52 PM
Cause who would want to use kamikaze pilots in the 21st century??????????
#11
Posted 31 January 2003 - 01:01 PM
I WOULD!!! *raises two hands* MWUA HA HA HA HA...!!!What about computercontrolled or distance controlled aircrafts???? (For kamikaze)
Cause who would want to use kamikaze pilots in the 21st century??????????

#12
Posted 31 January 2003 - 09:11 PM
CC
#13
Posted 01 February 2003 - 05:08 PM
Me too.... :devilsmile: :devilsmile: :devilsmile:I WOULD!!! *raises two hands* MWUA HA HA HA HA...!!!What about computercontrolled or distance controlled aircrafts???? (For kamikaze)
Cause who would want to use kamikaze pilots in the 21st century??????????
#14
Posted 03 February 2003 - 07:52 AM
Ok fair enough with the armour...I don't think that we invented shield technology for aircraft yet.
The same thing is with armour - it is not possible to equip aircraft with better armour than interceptors initially have as long as we use terrestrial materials, because as you may read in ufopaedia interceptors use latest technology on earth. But in case we want to add armour to aircraft (probably from new alien material), as an engineer I may only tell you that that the aircraft would need to be completely rebuild.
We may eventually add armour slot this option for tanks (they be constructed to be more damage resistant with a new revolutionary material such as alien alloys), but I think that option would be rather obsolete.
And about kamikaze - I think that pilots can eject several seconds before crashand then craft can be guided remotely from a control tower.
I was not implying that we had developed shield technology; but then again we haven't developed plasma technology, laser technology or blaster launchers but they can still be learnt in X-Com
I know shields don't exist yet but I'm sure that the aliens would have some sort of shielding around their ships; if we are able to adapt alien propulsion technology to our own ends I don't think it would be difficult to retro-fit a shield generator once its been researched...
On another note...
The kamikaze isn't necessarily an intentional attack so you wouldn't be remotely piloting planes; you would attack the craft as normal intending to destroy it, you cause maybe 50% damage but the craft is just to powerful you have suffered 80% damage and will be dead in a few more shots; you could disengage and return to base for repairs, but if you do the alien infiltration attempt will almost certainly succeed, does the pilot sacrifice himself in order to help save the world? His bravery decides, also his reflexes could determine if he is able to eject in time or not...
http://www.pringle.3lx.com/
(Redirct... The real addy is a japanese word but the auto-filter cocks it up...)
#15
Posted 03 February 2003 - 09:14 AM
if i can save the craft i'd defintely bring it in for repairs.
#16
Posted 03 February 2003 - 01:50 PM
Country Value: £1,000,000+ per year funding?
I think I'd be willing to sacrifice a craft for the sake of my country; anyway, all I'm saying is I think the option should be there, if you'd prefer to risk losing the country and send your craft back for repairs by all means go ahead...

http://www.pringle.3lx.com/
(Redirct... The real addy is a japanese word but the auto-filter cocks it up...)
#17
Posted 06 February 2003 - 06:04 PM
#18
Posted 21 February 2003 - 11:19 AM
#19
Posted 24 February 2003 - 06:12 AM
Perhaps have a small bit of video footage pop up at one side showing an interceptor bringing down the alien craft (you could have similar footage for when a skyranger lands, etc).
http://www.pringle.3lx.com/
(Redirct... The real addy is a japanese word but the auto-filter cocks it up...)
#20
Posted 24 February 2003 - 07:28 AM
#21
Posted 19 May 2003 - 05:18 AM
#22
Posted 19 May 2003 - 07:47 AM
#23
Guest_drewid_*
Posted 19 May 2003 - 11:14 AM
Gun camera footage. appears in small window.
Live 3d render, Showing just the ufo against a sky background.
Gun/missile fire going in, plasma fire coming towards screen.
Ufo getting bigger smaller as you change aggression state of aircraft
(Imagine a nosecone version of the original radar view).
Smoke pours out as ufo is damaged.
Picture breaks up as plane gets damaged, goes blank if it goes down.(screenful of static).
How this works: Smoke and mirrors:Camera inside a sky/ground sphere, this sticks to the camera transform (so the sky/ground never gets closer).
change the texture on the sphere for day/night over land/water.
Then low poly version of the ufo, which the camera chases around a 3d worldspace. gunfire is the same sort of effect we'll need for the ingame stuff, same with smoke and explosions. so we should be able to reuse those effects and graphics.
This is just a brainfart, so best to run it past a coder first before I get too excited.
#24
Posted 19 May 2003 - 12:00 PM
#25
Posted 19 May 2003 - 02:24 PM
You got me thinking...

So, I guess my point is, if we are going to have any radio calls...then this would be the place to put em. It could really draw you into the game, and increase the mood. Imagine assualting a battleship that you just saw, and HEARD, take out two of your best interceptor pilots... Could really increase the emotions. For some reason, a lot of people feel for airmen, so lets use that...
What ya think?
Gold
Rule #33:
Celatid venom is a paralytic nerve toxin, not 'happy juice".
---

#26
Posted 25 June 2003 - 11:24 PM
*waggles eyebrows and waves a cigar stub*
Seriously though, the radio calls might be cool, but you'd have to do a few of em to keep it from being repetitive. I mean, the first couple times you hear the panicky voice of Lieutenant Generic as he bites the dust, it could be tense, but after awhile it's just background noise.
#27
Posted 26 June 2003 - 06:31 AM

And as a big Arnold fan, I'm partial to that as well.
There is talk about having sound bites for the soldiers in the battlescape during critical points, like shooting an alien or dying, so if that happens this could be another item added to the list. If we get several people male and female to record similar things, you'd have plenty of variety.
#28
Posted 26 June 2003 - 06:40 AM

#29
Posted 26 June 2003 - 10:59 AM
cybervoisce: "I'm here to kick donkey and chew gum, damn I'm all outta gum."
"I'm gonna rip your head off and sh1t down your neck!"
"You're an inspiration for birth control"
"Damn you're Ugly!"
There are lots of option for the interception bit I think We need to find a real killer idea.
I think kamikaze is out though. The game should be hard and tight andlosses cannot be afforded. It is as much about the minimanagement as it is about the missions. In I reckon is morre about what goes on out of the missions.
And so I think the gamer should play a character. So if the character goes on the mission the gamer plays it. If not then not so. It would mean mission which could be simulated from a distance. With distance management.
#30
Posted 26 June 2003 - 03:39 PM
"Watch it! Theres a long way down!"
"That'll teach you not to not to mess with humanity!"
"Bang bang, your dead!"
"pitty...you almost got me down....not!"
"now, why didn't you take your time, and got some REAL weaponry???"
i belive that you already PLAY a cherrecter...you are the commander of X-com, and you never go to battle. The battlescape is....well....diffrent...
the truth about scientologySome people say that dreams are a portal to the subconscious. If that is so, I am a very disturbed person.
#31
Posted 26 June 2003 - 05:43 PM
In xcom1 you play a sort of god who directly control every poor sod troopers moves and can see anywhere on the whole globe and spin in like a base ball and accelerate time. Really if you weremanaging this sort of project you would have a location in a base and some missions you would be able to skip and some you would have to simply not be present. Some missions you could control from the drop ship, by seeing images from soldier headsets, andriod eyepiece live feeds and also and cameras you may have on the drop ship or suspended from gantries/ballons/antigrav devices.
You could walk and and fight amoungst the men or you could commandeer an android and play with the mouse and keyboard in the drop ship like you were playing counter strike at home - this lets you still tactially guide your men. , or you could walk out the craft and fight amoungst your men. This lets you assign a trooper to guide then men so if you down't want to you can leave then craft and go kisk donkey. The ideal mixture of brain testing or outright death&slaughter. Perfect for a relxing evening in
#32
Posted 26 June 2003 - 08:25 PM
Maybe Xcom pilots can gain XP too. just a thought.
#33
Guest_Jim69_*
Posted 26 June 2003 - 08:43 PM
#34
Posted 27 June 2003 - 01:45 PM




#35
Posted 28 June 2003 - 12:26 PM
No hangars in apoc????? hmm....I though that they had pretty many vehicles to start with...
the truth about scientologySome people say that dreams are a portal to the subconscious. If that is so, I am a very disturbed person.
#36
Posted 28 June 2003 - 01:26 PM
