Actually, I think artillery should be as easy as this. A skillful player will be able to show their mastery of the game regardless of the difficulty of the controls. Making the controls more difficult than absolutely necessary is counter-productive. You reduce the playerbase, frustrate players, cause endless amount of noob-griefing, make commanding more difficult and for what? So that some players can call themselves 'skilled' because they have mastered the ridiculously difficult controls? This is the hallmark of badly designed games.
Flak was pretty interesting. It was essentially get close and explode, hopefully doing damage by shrapnel. Closer they explode, more shrapnel. If you get enough small holes, the aircraft goes down. Much better than the hit or miss (binary system) of trying to shoot it with regular bullets. Can't hit anything that high. Now, when they come closer, AA guns can rip them to shreds if the gunner is good enough and the pilot screws up. Try playing some Microsoft Flight Combat Simulator. It's pretty sweet and said to be fairly realistic. Sure the flak doesn't kill you right away, but hang in the flak zone long enough and you become a sitting duck for the bigger bullets and enemy aircraft as your engine starts to slow down. Back onto topic....
oh Devs can we please have rideable stationary turrets for anti air or anti tank. They'll be like DU HMG turrets, but the bullets don't do much damage and shoot faster. Com placeable, more useful than missle launcher if used by skilled player :D
no. you reduce the playerbase by turning this game into a boring piece of crap by giving everything an easy button.
we dont have to make controls over complicated.' Take BF2 control style, add toggleable option that when turned on prevents you from flipping upside down.(main problem with bf aicraft) Change thrust control: w adds thrust and it stays as high as you choose too s lowers thrust Light scount/support (training craft) and we are fine
The game is supposed to be FUN and ENJOYABLE How does giving difficult controls to airccraft accomplish this?
The controls definitely shouldnt be complicated. Lets look at a 1.0 litre front wheel drive hatchback and a 3.0 turbo mid rear sports car. Sit in the driving seat of either and its all pretty much the same, i press that to go, that to stop and turn this to steer. Oh and the gearstick needs to be moved occasionally. Simple. Which one can i obtain far more driving enjoyment from even though the controls are the same ? Do i really to make the ludicrously obvious conclusion to this point ?
That hatchback has some great fuel efficiency, which is the most important thing in the current climate.
...Which is why we should NOT implement BF2 style controls. Aircraft are supposed to support a main attack force, not BE the attack force.
Why not make the handling simple and innovative? Just make it so that it's easy to learn, hard to master. I think simple controlls are better. Better players will be better regardless of how difficult it is to fly aircraft in a game. There's a lot more to aircraft than just handling.
GUYS BF2 isnt hard to use if you go slowly. Its the perfect control style. Noobs can use it but they have to go SLOWLY or they die. Experienced players can do flips and stuff
I suspect that regardless of the control method, hitting terrain will not do significant damage (and certainly nothing that could seriously be called a 'crash'.) Having someone invest a game-deciding amount of res into two or three vehicles only to have them instantly crash without influencing anything at all is simply not fun.
that's going to look shit. if they bounce off walls then aircraft are just going to be a complete joke. I pictured them being cool. you're probably right, but still. ASS
what about giving them a minimum height above terrain? like they just climb if they ae gonna hit a wall
The main discussion here is how to fly an aircraft. But what about how to shoot from an aircraft. When the gun is static, then the aircraft handling should be easy. If the gun can be moved like a tank turret, then the handling should be more difficult.
I'm a little late to the party, but I have a question. What is the vehicles purpose? Each control type stems from a very specific intended roll in that game. [in my opinion] UT2k4's control layout and feel is arguably the most geared toward a one man VTOL/High Maneuverability Close Support Gunship. The controls are geared towards circling around a target, pumping away with missiles or machine gun fire. The lack of rolling creates stability for picking out targets, but at the cost of aerobatic maneuvering. Renegade and Metal Smith's suggestion would fit very well as a dropship or transport. You need a stable feeling for a large airframe, but if you have a turret, you need to be able to shoot that. It feels cumbersome, but not overly so to turn the vehicle by moving the weapons out of the firing arc, befitting a large, lumbering, reinforcement spewing behemoth. Battlefield 2/2142's layout fits extremely well if you have a jet/copter(/abomination-to-the-physics-required-for-flight contraption.) The VTOL for a craft like this would probably feel like an afterthought or a mechanism added only so you can land in tight spaces. Rolling means you can pull off things like immelmans, but with more controls, it can be hard to get the stability to hover on station to acquire/engage targets. Tovarich Cookie's Suggestion throws me for a loop, mostly because I can't get a feel for what an aircraft of these controls would handle like. On top of the different control types, there's the engine to consider. Given that the only two aircraft Source was ever designed to handle was the multiple engined combine dropships and the combine helicopters, a control scheme for a vehicle not designed to fly in that way is going to feel a little restrained or awkward. If I were flying the dropship in hl2, I'd want to fly it with the Renegade/Metal Smith layout and the helicopter very probably with the UT2k4 layout. If you want players to just jump in and not adjust, go with the Renegade layout, as that most fits the current default vehicle controls and would probably feel like it. [/in my opinion] I voted for the bf2 option because I like having as much control as possible, even if that makes things harder >_>
The C&C Renegade style is really easy to aim with, only thing i hated about it was having to hold down v or b to be able to move your tank's turret 360 =p. It gets my vote, as long as there is no "hold down v" part =D
Because if the tank controls transfer easily to the aircraft controls, the theory goes there'll be less problems. You know, positive learning transfers etc.
