Idea: LIB mk.2 & Insertion/Retreval LIB

[Ed the MAD]

okay, now, i'm an avid lover of the Liberator, but it has a number of problems. so, here are a couple variants of the Lib that would be a good idea.

Liberator Mk.2:
-added dorsal gun behind the Bombadier position.
-bombs drift horrizontaly 3 in. per foot traveled.


Liberator I/R:
-removed bomb bay, and ball turret.
-lengthend fuselage, with added seating for six passengers.
-added gun on tailcone, with gunner sitting where the bombadier used to be.
-added afterburners.

[xmodum]

well, they do sound good,hmmm, i guess ill take a bite!
seriously tho they sound good, id love new planes

[Otherick]

well the second one isnt realy a bomber and like the devs said awhile ago or atleast i think the devs or soemone said they dont want the game to be "too air dominant"

[Ed the MAD]

well the second one isnt realy a bomber and like the devs said awhile ago or atleast i think the devs or soemone said they dont want the game to be "too air dominant"

if they didn't want it to be "too air dominant" they shouldn't have made Ceryshen all cliffs and bridges.

in anycase, the fact of the matter is, it won't be. i have never seen a gal fully loaded. and i'm a Gal pilot! it's simple, nobody is ever willing to wait for a gal to load. they always jump out beforehand and run off towards the nearest "Zerg." an eight man air transport with one tailgun is not going to be anything more than a cheaper alternative to the utterly massive galaxy. as for the Lib mk. 2, it'll replace the existing Liberator.

[Rayder]

You have to give disadvantages along with your advantages, it's called balance.

Mk.2

- Weaker armor than Liberator
- Slower speed

I/R

- Slower than the other Liberators
- Slower turning rate
- Lower flight ceiling

[xmodum]

- Lower flight ceiling
question, y did they even make a flight ceiling? i mean , its good cuz planes can only go to the point of almost not seeing them from the ground , but y ? :doh:

[Rayder]

So they couldn't travel across the cont without being seen, so ground troops can kill them, so gals couldn't drop their load without being detected (same with libs), so people wouldn't be asshats and fly up there and fuck around. To annoy people who think the grief system should be eliminated.

[Ed the MAD]

Mk.2

- Weaker armor than Liberator--no. same armour
- Slower speed--no. just no.

you know, the trunk of the mk.2 would not be expanded. the dorsal gun would use the same ammo as the tail gun. this is the disadvantage. less ammunition for the weapons.


I/R

- Slower than the other Liberators--now, this would fit. -10 to speed. making it just as fast as the Galaxy.
- Slower turning rate--that would defeat the whole purpose of having a smaller insertion boat.
- Lower flight ceiling--that's just retarded. all aircraft have the same flight ceiling. you're suggesting making it less high flying than all the other aircraft. how about 20-40% less armour? i mean, after all, it's a skiff. skiffs don't really need much armour. also, this aircraft can only carry personel. no vehicles. that's a disadvantage right there.



i don't call this balance, i call it "common sence." look into it.

[DeadTeddy]

the thing is about aircraft is that they have amazing power but cost too much and need too much ground support for any country to make them available to anyone who wants them. if planetside made aircraft have the same power they have in the real world, everyone will cert them. there's no real fair way to limit the number of aircraft and my guess is that's why they don't make them too powerful.

I'm a real fan of planes, I build R/C models and all, but this game can't hold them.

as for the flight ceiling, I heard it's a technical issue.

[Rayder]

How would giving the Lib twice as much AA power be a disadvantage? It would run out faster? Well Lib's aren't ment to last long, just quick runs.

"-bombs drift horrizontaly 3 in. per foot traveled." This would mean the Lib would get to start dropping it's bombs earlier, and hit it's target, instead of actually going over it. Thus, I called for slower speed, because it would make libs overfuckingpowered. Also, your trying to replace the Liberator, so, I gave this one weaker armor, due to the fact that it is better than the current one.

This other one is just whack. You want a personell carrier that is better than the current one. Seeing as you didn't describe where it could be "purchased" it stands to reason that it could be gotten with a Tech plant. You've just destroyed the Galaxy for infantry drops, so, I give it some disadvantages so it wouldn't make the Gal useless, except for ANT runs, and you attack me with a "commen 'sence'" line. You have no understanding of balance, you have no clue what your vehicles would do to the existing ones. I suggest you think about your ideas in full before you post them. Better yet, don't post them at all if all your going to do is attack people for pointing out the obvious.

[DeadTeddy]

in his suttle way, rayder did say pretty much everything that needs to be said.

[Rayder]

Subtle :)

[DeadTeddy]

whatever, when your hebrew is as good as my english we'll talk.

[Ed the MAD]

How would giving the Lib twice as much AA power be a disadvantage? It would run out faster? Well Lib's aren't ment to last long, just quick runs.

the fact of the matter is, the current Liberator is largely ony effectine when in high altitudes, however, this makes them rather hard to attack. it flat out needs a dorsal gun to survive at low altitudes.

"-bombs drift horrizontaly 3 in. per foot traveled." This would mean the Lib would get to start dropping it's bombs earlier, and hit it's target, instead of actually going over it. Thus, I called for slower speed, because it would make libs overfuckingpowered. Also, your trying to replace the Liberator, so, I gave this one weaker armor, due to the fact that it is better than the current one.

i meant side to side. they drift, like with the CoF of the weapons, thus affecting a larger area, while keeping their current power. they don't drift forward or back, that would be vertically(if you're facing down, that is). also, this makes the bombs less accurate, so you have to be at a lower altitue if you want to hit a specific target(like a Vehicle terminal). the whole idea of this is to force the Liberator into the flak.

This other one is just whack. You want a personell carrier that is better than the current one. Seeing as you didn't describe where it could be "purchased" it stands to reason that it could be gotten with a Tech plant. You've just destroyed the Galaxy for infantry drops, so, I give it some disadvantages so it wouldn't make the Gal useless, except for ANT runs, and you attack me with a "commen 'sence'" line. You have no understanding of balance, you have no clue what your vehicles would do to the existing ones. I suggest you think about your ideas in full before you post them.

you're right, i don't have any concept of balance. because in my personal expirience, when someone tries to balance something, they wind up making it worse. i apollogise for the ""common sence" line. it was very inappropriate of me. i will make no excuse for it. however, i will stand by this skiff. the thing is, i have no idea what the armour stats are for any of the vehicles, so i can't say with any degree of accuracy whether or not reducing armour would be a good idea, however, as it is a skiff, it has minimal armour, and limited AA capability. it's only good for quick runs to drop small fire teams behind enimy lines. tell me, how often do you see a Galaxy? i have seen five in the pase day. and they both got shot out of the sky shortly after i noticed them. the galaxy is too damn big to be useful for every areal operation. not to mention they are some of the most attractive targets around. the Galaxy is like the areal version of the Sunderer. the LibSkiff is the areal verson of the Deliverer. it has one chaingun in the nose, one chaingun in the tail. seating for five passengers, one pilot, and one gunner. i have seen from real time experience that five people cannot do much against a well-defended base, three soldiers are not very good at holding a recently captured base, and Galaxies tend to draw too damn much attention to themselves.
i did infact think this through, i thought it up as i was flying my liberator, and i spoke about it with my fellow outfit members. they all liked the idea of having a lighter troop aircraft. in retrospect, six people wouldn't likely fit in the Lib's fuselage. five is a more realistic number. two on either side, and one in a little rear seat.


Better yet, don't post them at all if all your going to do is attack people for pointing out the obvious.

i'll just go ahead and classify that as a retalliation to my insult.
-------------------------------------------------------------

i'm not an unreasonable man, how about this for disadvantages?
-minimal armour. unable to survive an AA MAX salvo, or a mosquito attack.
-top speed of 80KPH. no afterburners.
-smaller trunk space. that means less ammo for the two chainguns.

this way, it'll only be good for covert ops. like blowing Gens behind enimy lines, or capping towers. of couse it'll require the Dropship Center to obtain, because it is a dropship. also, it cannot carry MAXs, either. which means that the Galaxy will still be the best option for heavy areal drops into hevily fortified bases. think of the LibSkiff like the rubber dingy the Navy SEALS use.

[Rayder]

i meant side to side. they drift, like with the CoF of the weapons, thus affecting a larger area, while keeping their current power. they don't drift forward or back, that would be vertically(if you're facing down, that is). also, this makes the bombs less accurate, so you have to be at a lower altitue if you want to hit a specific target(like a Vehicle terminal). the whole idea of this is to force the Liberator into the flak.What would be the point of having two vehicles which do the same main damage, but one is less accurate than the other? The whole idea is pointless then, especially if you have no control over them, and both will get shot out of the sky by AA no matter what, so it doesn't matter if one has more tail-end firepower than the other.

Now that it requires a dropship to use and has less armor, it's an o.k. idea.

[Ed the MAD]

What would be the point of having two vehicles which do the same main damage, but one is less accurate than the other? The whole idea is pointless then, especially if you have no control over them, and both will get shot out of the sky by AA no matter what, so it doesn't matter if one has more tail-end firepower than the other.

as for the Lib mk. 2, it'll replace the existing Liberator.
the whole idea of this is to force the Liberator into the flak.

Now that it requires a dropship to use and has less armor, it's an o.k. idea.

of course. please understand, it was never meant to replace anything. it has it's little nitch, and it fits that nitch far better than the aircraft that is currently used for that purpose. i'm of course reffering to the Mosquito.

[Rayder]

It's a bomber, not a fighter. It fights from high altitudes, not low. AA can hit it. AA DOES it hit. Other aircraft can destroy it. Other aircraft DO destroy. No reason to force it into a role that it wouldn't fit.

[ORANGE]

CHEESY!!!!! UM UM UM UMMMMMMMM.

[Rayder]

:banplz:

[Ed the MAD]

It's a bomber, not a fighter. It fights from high altitudes, not low. AA can hit it. AA DOES it hit. Other aircraft can destroy it. Other aircraft DO destroy. No reason to force it into a role that it wouldn't fit.

you raise a valit point. however, it would be good if the bomb weren't so...accurate. you have to remember, i fly them. the AV bombs never really hit the target. mainly because you have to be flying in a straight line for te bombs to be accurate, and they hit in a perfectly straight line. that downright sucks when you're target is either moving, or you are unable to make the flight corrections in time to hit it. makeing them land in a not-so straight line makes them much more likely to hit something, and it also looks much more realistic.


CHEESY!!!!! UM UM UM UMMMMMMMM.

eat me.

[BUGGER]

Liberator Mk.2:
-added dorsal gun behind the Bombadier position.
-bombs drift horrizontaly 3 in. per foot traveled.


Liberator I/R:
-removed bomb bay, and ball turret.
-lengthend fuselage, with added seating for six passengers.
-added gun on tailcone, with gunner sitting where the bombadier used to be.
-added afterburners.
No. And the seating for 6 passengers, HELL NO.


Whats wrong with the current Lib? ITS A BOMBER, not a fast food restrant. If there was a such things as land based missles, maybe, but no.


And if you want a smaller version of the Galaxy, use a vehicle thats made for transporting.....even if its the only one that can suit that position right now.

[Ed the MAD]

how about 4 passengers? and that's just the thing. th Gal doesn't suit all the roles that are asked of it. i guess that's just my opinnion. tell me, how many of you currently pilot Gals?

[Doppler]

Ed if you've never seen a fully loaded gal you havnt been playing long. THe gal does need some sort of love, whether its to be able to be deployed at any place connected to a dropship center, some kind of teleporting ability (think sub orbital insertion) to get it to the target faster, or just better handling all around. Dont get me wrong I whould love to see some kind of helicopter in this game, but the flight model doesnt support it.

[Ed the MAD]

*sigh* look, we have a heavy ground transport, and a light ground transport. why cant their be a light air transport to go with our current heavy? you know what? screw it. it seems like many made up their minds long before i even mad this thread.

[Doppler]

Because think about it, then whatd be the point of the Light Ground transport? Honestly who whould rather drive then fly, I see far more deliverers on the road then sunderers, because the sunderer suffers from the same problems as the gal, its big slow and unwieldy and what it gains in armor it more then looses in mobility. Add that to the fact that in planetside everyone and their brother has some sort of vehicle we see the current scenario.

[BUGGER]

Ed dont give up. Me myself wants a light transport, what you want is just a smaller Galaxy with bigger guns.....well maybe not guns but uses.


Dont get me wrong I whould love to see some kind of helicopter in this game, but the flight model doesnt support it.
Dude every air vehicle is a freaken helicopter, I think YOU haven been playing PS too long.


We need a transport with the sole of a Wraith but the duties of a Deliverer. It cannot be armed no mater what, or else the Galaxy is going bye bye.



And really I dont see the Galaxy being useless as you do. Its not that it just sucks, its just whats the point of it.

Nearly everyone is in an Outfit. When some one logs on all they ask is where are we, get invite to some random squad, see they are on some retarded cont, and take a HART there. Theres no more of that regroup at sanc and take a piss break kind of squads. Galaxys use to be everything when no one had Outfits. You could spam broadcast, get an invite, go to a villa and load in the Galaxy. The only time you can do that now is when a raid/zerg is forming at a warpgate.

Galaxy's didn't die to suxage, they died to outfits.



.....k now that i explained why Galaxys suck, now the light transport is gona make the Galaxy suck even more.....but i still want the light transport!

[Rayder]

We have VTOLs in PS. Thus, we need a super-fast HTOL plane for strafing runs. But, that is off topic, so, yes, we do need a quick insertion aircraft. The Galaxy is currently an assault carrier, being able to drop off light vehicles and 10 infantry (6 passengers, 3 gunners, 1 pilot) and 2 MAXs.

[xmodum]

nothing's ever goin to be faster than the skeeter , hope u knew that