New map sizing for Planes/Infantries

On this very page myself and Chris0132` suggested how you could incorporate infantry into large maps and make them useful/necessary.

 

Yes, but infantry won't work well there. The main point of 16X maps is aircraft battles.

 

Infantry won't work well in infantry-only areas?

Ok, aircraft dogfights and stuff will be awesome fun, but it can have a bit more depth than that too.

I mean, as previsouly suggested, have some kind of bunker in the mountains that gives your team more res. Make another bunker that has great anti-aircraft implacements but only infantry can take it. Suddenly, instead of a game of "dogfight planes constantly until one team runs out of tickets/commander dies/base destroyed" you have a much deeper game with transport planes taking infantry to drop off points to cap res, fighter planes ambushing to try and kill the transports so that their own transporrts can make a drop off, fighters escorting transports in case they get ambushed, bombers dropping shit all over infantry who are running for the anti-air towers, infantry fighting over and controlling anti-air towers to give their aircraft an advantage overhead etc etc etc.

I understand the MAIN point of large maps is for aircraft to be used, but that doesn't mean you can't have everything else as well. What makes the game unique, interesting and fun is that you are given a choice, and multiple possibilites for how you want to wage war.

 

What i'm saying is that 16X maps are supposed to be focused on aircraft, aka you have fun flying around at high speeds, blacking out and blowing other people out of the sky, not dropping off infantry to capture a useless flag.

 

That's all well and good, but what I'm saying is if the useless flag is actually useful and worth fighting over, you add an extra dimension to the game, and a sense of purpose and strategy other than just "kill stuff" which you can get in any aircraft fighter game.

 

Aerial capture zones anyone.

 

Seems like solokiller is talking about a map like vehicle training for planes, thats all.

 

Aircraft are going to cost quite a bit, so you'll have enough refineries around your base for that, if it's not just a flag giving a ton of it at start.
Thus, there's no point in having a flag to capture, because the map is so large that you're better off dropping a barracks, even though infantry won't help much against aircraft.

 

Dropship/Transport Helicopter would be the shit.

 

The problem is that if Aircraft cost too much it will be a bit unfair if noobs just build planes (not knowing HOW to drive), crash and eat into the teams res, ALSO the team loseing will be at a MASSIVE dissadbvantage. I dont think the cost of planes should be in the base cost BUT should be in the cost of the engines and weapons. Allowing the loseing team to get out planes that have basic stuff (basic jet engine, Basic armour, Basic weapons...etc). This is what is done in Warzone 2100 where u design ur tanks and weapons and enignes are the big cost.

Doing this in my opinion will allow both sides to have a fighting chance. The winning team will still have the advantage BUT a cople of vetarin pilots will be able to take out the better planes with skill rather than weapons.

(or for epic lulz the team with the veterans is the one that is winning and the best planes But u know what i mean )

P.S before u say "BUT IF THEY COST TOO LITTE THEY WILL BE SPAMMED!!" im not saying that they should cost tuppence (thats a old british 1p). They should still on basics cost about 800res for just your basic fighter plane fitted with basic weapons/armour/engine

 

The simple solution is to make advanced aircraft weaponry only slightly more useful than standard stuff, so if you're taking a budget plane out you'll stand a chance.

 

only using transport planes would improve teamwork

players cant really walk over there soloing ... and plains will drop you right into the action, what more is there to ask?

 

I think trains would be great idea,they could allow infantry to get from point A to B a lot faster,they could also be susceptible to air attack and sabotage,plus they would be on a set of tracks built by the commander,and would be very hard to abuse.It could even have an auto racks of sorts to carrying tanks,without haveing the need for a vf at the front lines.

 

Yeah, uh. No.
He emans func_tracktrains, not constructable trains. Sabotaging and destroying trains and train tracks is actually really fucking difficult to implement, at best you'll get a train which moves around carrying troops [I've already done this and it worked nicely.]

Oh, and tanks fuck up when put on trains, if you get inside the tank you die instantly.

 

FFS, only think of transport planes.

Simple, effective, and not hard to fuck up...like trains >_<

 

Trains are actually a pretty viable transport method for infantry, it also keeps the infantry in certain places, obviously planes can go anywhere but a transit system forces infantry to fight in certain places.

 

That's generally a bad thing, and something that doesnt go along with the idea of an RTS.

 

Empires isn't an RTS, it's an FPS, only two people on the server can possibly be said to be playing an RTS.

FPS games funnel players together to get them to fight.

 

be fun if we could shoot from planes if not driving (only in transports)

 

you have to constrain the tank to the train the moment it moves

on train pass path_corner
emp_tank $ set parent train