Glider insertion, also how I would like AA guns to work.

It's cool because you get to sit in the thing while it crashes into rocks and trees and goes flying, it's cool for the same reason burnout is cool, and for the same reason driving up a cliff in duststorm with a 3 phase jeep then barrel rolling twenty times and landing in a pond is cool, it's also more balanced than paratroopers and orbital drop pods, and it encourages squad work.

The AA gun idea is basically designed to keep aircraft from being the ultimate offensive tool against bases, and relegating them to taking on tanks and smaller bases, to use them against a base requires that you remove the radar first.

 

MOOtant is saying aircraft will never be added, so really, your whole thread is moot.

 

Cough, Cough, its not a aircraft its a glider... you dont need aircrafts for that

 

Same thing, same answer.

 

So far, I've seen the beginnings of Fighters and Bombers in the game already somewhere.

the prototype fighter was shown in an interview given by krenzo.

The bomb bay weapon is already written into the scripts, but does not yet do anything. (weapon type 5)

So far the basic idea is, from what I can tell, having AA Aircraft, AS aircraft, and transport oriented aircraft. Anti Infantry I have only seen rumors of, but it is probably coming as well.

We do not know how krenzo or anyone intended to implement AA weapons, other than the fact that aircraft fly too fast to be hit by regular missiles, and too high for a standard tank to be able to shoot it with it's turret.

Tanks are rumored to be getting gun pod type weapons, and the models different depending on what the tank is equipped with. This will probably be used to give them either an MG or turret that has a larger range of motion, but I can only speculate to that extent. i've also seen a lot of popularity over the idea of having a second gun pod being manned by infantry.

How radar works probably would not have changed, though it is unknown whether they ever intended to have radar help with any automated turrets, or anything like that. Their range probably would have been increased regardless of what anyone said, simply because the maps are going to get a tad bit larger.

Thats pretty much all that I know, and based on that, I suggested constructively what I thought could make an idea like a glider work. If you don't like the idea because aircraft aren't implemented and this is suggesting a fix to an issue that does not exist, fine, you have a valid point. If it is because chris can be an asshole, fine you have a point. but that doesn't change the fact that this is a suggestion, and not any worse than most in here you guys don't go on for pages about some things that are much worse than this one.

 

What else is there to add? It's going to be rather dull otherwise I think. There's only so much you can do with ground vehicles.

 

Krenzo said that he lost his interest and motivation in Empires. I don't know what about Megel and Duke but I wouldn't expect that they want to make models for it. What we plan to do (I and dizzyone) is:
1. Finish port to Orange Box SDK.
2. Fix biggest balance problems to make games more enjoyable.

When these things are done and we have modelers available it's possible to think about aircrafts.

I don't want to pretend that a crappy and hard to learn game will get better when there will be even more features.

 

What I find ironic is that Chris admitted in a thread somewhere that he doesn't even play the games he maps for, yet he's made a few suggestion in the forums and tried to shoehorn them into everyones vision of what Empires will be.

 

oh noez ze blimps

 

Ah well that would make sense.

Emphasis on bringing the current stuff up to a higher standard and adding polish to the existing game is sensible.

I don't have to play a game to enjoy it. I enjoy making things for it, and that encompasses all things, including my suggestions.

As has been said, how unpleasant I am as a person and my motivation for doing things is entirely irrelevant, it doesn't affect the validity of my arguments, whatever it may be.

 

Good games doesn't come from things that a developer thinks that people wants to play, but what the creator WANTS to play. So go play now.

Yea, now.

 

No they don't.

Playing a game does not confer some magical ability to be a better developer. You can develop entirely without playing a game, the only part that requires playtesting is the bug testing and the balance.

 

It sure helps with understanding of game mechanics though. ;O

 

True.
It's actually a very long and taxing process that involves experience and concentration.

Most lose interest along the way or just don't have the stuff to hack it.
This is why there are so many crappy games out there.

 

Precisely, enjoying playing the game you are making is simply a motivation to continue working for it. The part of empires I enjoy is the bit that gives me an excuse to make huge maps with a nice texture set, and hopefully in the future, 8x scaling so I can make ever bigger maps.

I don't have to play the game to enjoy it, and I don't have to enjoy it to stick with it. I used to map for gmod which I don't like at all as a game.

 

Playing it also gives you a better understanding of the game you're playing.
It's even more helpful to have other players' accounts of the game as they play it... The Valve devs watch beta testers over their shoulders, to get a good idea of how people are playing the game and how they're enjoying themselves as they play it.

Though, I suppose that's the sign of a good developer, rather than the making of one.

 

Oh I know you have to watch how other people play it and understand the mechanics, but you don't have to play the game yourself to do either of those, although it is one approach to understanding the former.

 

ONE MOMENT! you say that you want the mortar nerved and you dont like that weapon without even playing the game?
You cant balance a game without real game enviroment aka.: Random public servers

 

I didn't like the weapon last time I played. I used to play empires and probably will again next time some content is released so that I can get the new balance, but other than that I don't see the need for playing it.

My argument about the mortar is a hypothetical one, practically nobody is good enough with the mortar to make it deserving of a nerf, but I still dislike weapons which require extensive mastery to use well for the reasons I outlined in the thread, which stand whether or not I have actually played the game.

This thread is going off-topic and I am becoming bored with this argument.

 

Thats all that matters. We are mindless drones for your will.
When we bore you... or you are proven wrong, leave the thread.
Okay maybe the thread did become slightly off topic, but your elitist attitude Chris is going to piss off a lot of people.