Possible New Fighter-Bomber Joint Strike Machine?

[HiroshiChugi]

I keep hearing talk about a new air vehicle. Not the Bastion, but a sort of joint-strike fighter of sorts. I keep thinking of something like this whenever it comes up:
http://fc08.deviantart.net/fs70/i/2013/122/a/e/hero_s_blade___take_two_by_mctuner-d63sxng.jpg

Thoughts?

[ThatGoatGuy]

So like an upside down liberator?

[HiroshiChugi]

So like an upside down liberator?

Lolwut? O.o

[Whiteagle]

Is this what the Angel is suppose to be, or has the game of Telephone taken my own suggestion for an Aircraft based on the Liberator where the second seat controls the Bomb Bay/Guided Bombs/Guided Missiles and warped it into a rumor?

[wasdie]

Are you talking about a 2 man ES Interceptor/Attacker or something like that? I'm kind of not seeing a role that isn't already fulfilled by an ESF.

I hear the ESF is going to be getting an unguided bomb to replace the rocket pods, so there will be a few more options for new tactics there. If the galaxy can get some love it would be a great gunship (kind of is already in the right hands) and the liberator is a great bomber.

If anything I could see them adding a larger class of dedicated fighter to this game if they expand the combat to space battles. Otherwise I don't see the point in a heavier fighter than the ESF except for pure fun.

[shaql]

probably the latter, WhiteAngel.

[Maarvy]

Looks comfy , like you could rollerscate or play tennis while wearing it . All the while safe in the knowlage that the wings will keep it firmly in your gusset ...

OH ! its a aircraft , riiight . Ok forget what I just said .

[Whiteagle]

probably the latter, WhiteAngel.
*Punches Shaq!*
The name's WhitEagle!

CONJOINED "E"!!!

[HiroshiChugi]

Are you talking about a 2 man ES Interceptor/Attacker or something like that?

More or less, yes. I would actually see the one in the image the VS variant, because of the curved wings. I would have the two man set-up like so:

The Pilot: He controls the flight path of the aircraft and its defensive maneuvers and the rocket pods as well (depending on the aircraft's loadout [either rocket pods or bombs]).

The Gunner: He controls the nose gun and its firing direction as well as the bomb bay doors and the dropping of the bombs.

[phungus]

Are you talking about a 2 man ES Interceptor/Attacker or something like that? I'm kind of not seeing a role that isn't already fulfilled by an ESF.

Two man shredder AA libs are already a viable build that alot of people have fun with. Imagine how awesome a vehicle that was actually designed as a two man A2A fighter could be.

[HiroshiChugi]

Two man shredder AA libs are already a viable build that alot of people have fun with. Imagine how awesome a vehicle that was actually designed as a two man A2A fighter could be.

And I'm one of those people. ;)

[Lonehunter]

I keep hearing talk about a new air vehicle.
Where? When? Who?

Just seems like a private concept idea with a "someone said they're making it!" label.

[Dougnifico]

The next air vehicle should be a non-hovering interceptor. Use tech plant runways and install a runway in the WG.

[Fafnir]

Just seems like a private concept idea with a "someone said they're making it!" label.

Not quite. There are files in PS2 named like "Angel_Flare", "Angel_Flare_Big", etc. It could be just a tease, but nevertheless it's a hint.

[HiroshiChugi]

The next air vehicle should be a non-hovering interceptor. Use tech plant runways and install a runway in the WG.


I really like this idea, it might actually give more and new use to the lock-on launchers.

[Lonehunter]

Non hover tech just seems like going backwards. If you're going to make an ESF like vehicle with a co pilot your standard gunner turret just wont do. They need to have a Phoenix launcher, or a guided bomb with laze like the AV turret or NC Raven...

[OmegaPREDATOR]

I'm interested by that concept.

Maybe one nose gun for the pilot and something like the Shredder on the top for the gunner could be interresting Air-Air unit.

[HiroshiChugi]

I'm interested by that concept.

Maybe one nose gun for the pilot and something like the Shredder on the top for the gunner could be interresting Air-Air unit.

Now this would be interesting, but maybe reduce the size of the gun. We don't want anything too big, now do we? ;)

[Phantomdestiny]

i would like a non VTOL aircraft

[Boildown]

i would like a non VTOL aircraft

This. With actual aerodynamics, including the threat of stalling if you go too slow. And a top speed that's actually faster than the slowest WW2 era aircraft.

[GeoGnome]

I could get behind the idea of a fixed wing craft being used as an interceptor.

Really fast, new kinds of flying...

The thing is you'd have to rebalance the ESF to make this work, basically giving the ESF a more Gunship-esque roll.

[wasdie]

This. With actual aerodynamics, including the threat of stalling if you go too slow. And a top speed that's actually faster than the slowest WW2 era aircraft.

Only problem with this is how fast you'll be able to traverse the entire map.

That's the only real reason they are so slow. Being able to zoom across the map in less than 30 seconds wouldn't be that great.

With more speed comes more distance needed.

[HiroshiChugi]

We need this! Also, this all will be discussed this weekend during my live broadcast of my first episode of AuraxiCom Broadcasting.

[ShadoViper]

Not quite. There are files in PS2 named like "Angel_Flare", "Angel_Flare_Big", etc. It could be just a tease, but nevertheless it's a hint.

Keep in mind it could also be a reference to the AC-130 Gunship flares and a new animation style. I say this because they look like angel wings or often described as looking angelic.

[Dougnifico]

Screw it. Amazing ideas all around. SOE, give us interceptors and strike-fighters please! lol

[HiroshiChugi]

Screw it. Amazing ideas all around. SOE, give us interceptors and strike-fighters please! lol

I agree with this.^ T^T

[shaql]

*Punches Shaq!*
The name's WhitEagle!

CONJOINED "E"!!!

I know, I know :P

as for the Angel, I analyzed some data, and looks like I was compleeeetely wrong. Considering I have only the flare data, I think it's just that - flares. Not a vehicle. Judging by the name, this could be some massive, C130-style flares for the Galaxy, but idk, I'm too stupid :P

[Whiteagle]

...So I punched Shaquille O'neal for nothing?

[HiroshiChugi]

Well honestly, there are already Hossin files in the game, so I don't see why the Angel files couldn't be another vehicle or other things could be new vehicles.

[firestrike]

i rather have a true jet fighter the way ESF work made them feel and work like a very fast helicopter.

[Phantomdestiny]

i really doubt angel is just a new type of flare . they have other issue than make pretty flares also the fact that Higby evaded the questions about angel when basti and other vs were talking to him seems very suspicious . he would said it's just a new type of flare if that was the case.

[HiroshiChugi]

i really doubt angel is just a new type of flare . they have other issue than make pretty flares also the fact that Higby evaded the questions about angel when basti and other vs were talking to him seems very suspicious . he would said it's just a new type of flare if that was the case.

See, now THIS makes me highly suspicious about these "Angel" files in the game. I want to know what they are! D; If it's a new type of vehicle, then I can't wait. They'll probably be coming out with Hossin, or a little bit afterwards.

[Whiteagle]

i rather have a true jet fighter the way ESF work made them feel and work like a very fast helicopter.
Because they don't have the room to fly like REAL Jets...
Continents are only 14k across, a Boeing 747 could CRUSE from one shore to the other in just under a minute...

[HiroshiChugi]

Because they don't have the room to fly like REAL Jets...
Continents are only 14k across, a Boeing 747 could CRUSE from one shore to the other in just under a minute...

This is true. But, to fix this problem, the "Angel" could only have a top speed of say, 300 kph versus the 250 kph of the ESF. Hell, if that's too slow, bump it up to 350 kph. Maybe somewhere in the midle of about 325 kph. All of these are of course base speed.

[Baneblade]

The Angel is the internal name for the sky carrier concept referencing Firefly for the role name.

[Phantomdestiny]

The Angel is the internal name for the sky carrier concept referencing Firefly for the role name.

i wish or maybe it's the new lodestar?

[HiroshiChugi]

i wish or maybe it's the new lodestar?

I'd put my money on the new sky carrier. Angel is a more fitting name for it.

[Ghoest9]

@ OP

WTF

Why would we need a dual purpose aircraft when the existing fighters already are too good against ground troops?

[Phantomdestiny]

I'd put my money on the new sky carrier. Angel is a more fitting name for it.

so the bastion is the TR one , angel my guess is then the VS one .
and the NC would be the liberty?

[HiroshiChugi]

@ OP

WTF

Why would we need a dual purpose aircraft when the existing fighters already are too good against ground troops?
1. Quit trolling on all of my threads. :D
2. Soumadbro?
http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/20564212.jpg

so the bastion is the TR one , angel my guess is then the VS one .
and the NC would be the liberty?

I would venture to say so. Or the NC one would be the Angel and the VS something space/alien oriented.

[HiroshiChugi]

THREAD REVIVAL! To fix the speed problem, this talk of having no lading screen and having each continent joined by water, that could fix it. have these "interceptors" mainly for travelling between continents and fighting in between them over the open water.

[HiroshiChugi]

-bump- o.o

[Rivenshield]

A cert tree that would modify your empire-specific fighter into a two-man craft that laid sticks of bomb across the landscape -- like the *old* LIberator -- could be kind of fun...

[HiroshiChugi]

A cert tree that would modify your empire-specific fighter into a two-man craft that laid sticks of bomb across the landscape -- like the *old* Liberator -- could be kind of fun...

I actually just watch an hour long video of the common pool and NC vehicles of Planetside 1, and you just got me thinking, what if this new aircraft was the one you unlock after the Liberator (I forgot the name, but you got it after getting Bombardier 2). Maybe bring that one back? But have the option of the 2 bombs, cluster and anti-tank maybe? Easily countered due to its just-above-Reaver-strength-armour. Also, it doesn't HAVE to be non-VTOL, but it would be an interesting gameplay aspect, so you wouldn't have multiples of this aircraft just sitting and hovering over a spawn room, spamming cluster bombs basically just farming kills.

[blampoet]

Not quite. There are files in PS2 named like "Angel_Flare", "Angel_Flare_Big", etc. It could be just a tease, but nevertheless it's a hint.

these are angel flares:

https://www.google.de/search?q=angel+flare&safe=off&espv=210&es_sm=122&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=DeiNUoWeG8nSsgbKlICoBw&ved=0CDYQsAQ&biw=1653&bih=900

proally a graphical sequence for gal flares
would look cool...
proally died in the optimization

[blampoet]

on subject:
ok... you don't really know what a "joint strike fighter" is, do you?
because the current ESF, is that... "a jack of all trades, master of none" sort of thing

what you're talking about is a 2 seat "air superiority fighter" a la SU-35 Flanker
(which i SUPER SUPPORT as can be seen here:
http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?t=57002
and half a dozen other threads in the past year)

THE PROBLEM
(this only became clear to me lately) The dev's said "new vehicles ONLY if they do things TOTALLY different than what we have now"

let's say this gets made- and it becomes the go to thing to do a2a
and the lib keeps doing it's a2g
where do the ESF go?
you see?! nothing "totally different here"

so i've removed it from my sig and I think it's a waste of time (even though i totally think it'd be awesome)

[HiroshiChugi]

No, what I'm saying here is a faster, less-armoured lib of sorts. Except, it can hit WAY harder and WAY faster. Think of a glass cannon, if you will. Yes, it can hit hard as f*ck, but it can also take little to no punishment.

[blampoet]

No, what I'm saying here is a faster, less-armoured lib of sorts. Except, it can hit WAY harder and WAY faster. Think of a glass cannon, if you will. Yes, it can hit hard as f*ck, but it can also take little to no punishment.

you didnt catch that "new vehicle only if it does something different" thing, did ya?

saying something like "lib of sorts" isn't helping. :huh:


i'd love a 2 seater fighter (see the link above) but it would damage the current ESF, which i don't see happening :doh:
unless you have a solution for that?!

[HiroshiChugi]

you didnt catch that "new vehicle only if it does something different" thing, did ya?

saying something like "lib of sorts" isn't helping. :huh:


i'd love a 2 seater fighter (see the link above) but it would damage the current ESF, which i don't see happening :doh:
unless you have a solution for that?!

I do. Make the current ESF a strictly either ground only or air only vehicle. Hell, Make the Reaver a ground only ESF, the Scythe & Mossie air only, the NC's JSF Air only (mostly), and the VS and TR's JSF ground only (mostly).

[blampoet]

I do. Make the current ESF a strictly either ground only or air only vehicle. Hell, Make the Reaver a ground only ESF, the Scythe & Mossie air only, the NC's JSF Air only (mostly), and the VS and TR's JSF ground only (mostly).

dude... is it a language thing?
you seem to be writing english just fine....

we need to think of a way of not hurting the LIB (air2ground) or the ESF (air2air)

if the new ASF does EITHER, then (IMO) our chances of getting that wonderful 2 seater become less !!! :)

your suggestion would raise a SNOTSTORM of "it's OP" and/or "unbalanced" which i cannot even resolve by going back to faction advantages.... (like with the MBTs)

if there is 2 things to attack "ground to be attacked" and "air to e attacked" and you have 3 vehicles... 1 vehicle will have a problem. :)

so... what can either of the current air units do that isn't being done form the air already?!?!?!?

more advanced scouting?
fast small unit transport?
command & control?
electronic warfare?
(it won't be resupply, because we've seen the GAL will be getting that soon)

any ideas?

[HiroshiChugi]

dude... is it a language thing?
you seem to be writing english just fine....

we need to think of a way of not hurting the LIB (air2ground) or the ESF (air2air)

if the new ASF does EITHER, then (IMO) our chances of getting that wonderful 2 seater become less !!! :)

your suggestion would raise a SNOTSTORM of "it's OP" and/or "unbalanced" which i cannot even resolve by going back to faction advantages.... (like with the MBTs)

if there is 2 things to attack "ground to be attacked" and "air to e attacked" and you have 3 vehicles... 1 vehicle will have a problem. :)

so... what can either of the current air units do that isn't being done form the air already?!?!?!?

more advanced scouting?
fast small unit transport?
command & control?
electronic warfare?
(it won't be resupply, because we've seen the GAL will be getting that soon)

any ideas?

How about referring back to my response where I said that it could be used for fighting in between continents if they ever DO link them together by one gigantic sea? It's been said before that they may want to eventually do that and completely eliminate loading screens. IF they do this, and I heavily mean IF, this fighter could have a new role fulfilled due to its speed and non-VTOL, fighting in the skies between continents and faster transport between continents. :P




Edit: countermeasures for this "OP" aircraft would be extremely easy to implement compared to other things, such as the following:

Sunderers: add a cert tree for a bubble shield that will take the place of AMS, GSD, IR Smoke, etc. Its first cost would be about 150-200 certs. General size would be about 20 meters or so, only enough to fit very few vehicles inside. It will have a deploy circle around it similar to the AMS to prevent spamming. It will only last for about 5-10 seconds (maybe more) and have a cool-down of possibly 1:30-2:00+ to further prevent spamming. Further certification could allow for a longer time of it being deployed and/or the shield being able to take more damage. Think of it as a temporary warpgate-type-of-shield that can ONLY be used by Sundies.
Galaxy: Could POSSIBLY have the same thing, MAYBE! More likely not, due to "OP AS F*CK!" being screamed.

The reasoning behind this shield is due to the new fighter-bomber combination having bombs. Of course, the amount of bombs it would be able to carry would be EXTREMELY limited (only about 2-3 tank buster bombs and 1-2 cluster bombs that have to be released at a certain height or above or they will not break apart and do their job). One would not be able to cert into the amount of bombs, but allow for different variations of these bombs, such as 1-2 EMP bombs and/or 2-3 napalm bombs. The fighter-bombers will only be able to carry one type at a time and the types of bombs can only be switched out by spawning a new aircraft.

Naturally, the hit points of this aircraft will be either equal to or less than that of an ESF due to its high-caliber damage capabilities. We don't want them to be damn near invincible AND fast, now do we? ;)

Also, I would like to add that the aircraft will only be able to carry a Drake or a Walker as it's turreted gun and only a Vector or one similar to the Reaver's main gun (the M20 Mustang) as its main gun for the pilot. Maybe other types of weapons, but none like the Tank Buster on the Liberators. Now THAT would OP as F*ck IMHO. Keep in mind, there is NO tail gunner, only a top gunner. The aircraft would have NO VTOL more than likely so it would be EXTREMELY vulnerable to attacks from underneath and behind. Any attacks met from above could potentially end in a deadly result for the attacking aircraft. This aircraft could also become the potential bomber for Planetside 2 as the Liberator is more of a gunship than a bomber, it has no bombs, after all! IMHO, it's really just a VTOL C-130 Spectre of sorts. Planetside 2 could really use an actual BOMBER at one point or another, and this could be it! Granted, the devs COULD make it VTOL, but it could be labeled as OP because it would be able to resupply mid-flight by hovering next to an ammo Galaxy. When in reality, it should only be able to resupply at a landing strip of sorts. sure, it could resupply by flying past a Galaxy, but it would need to make several passes to do so. And, without an extremely skilled pilot, it could have a deadly and disastrous end result due to a crash from one flying into the other. You see, to every counter to have to my idea(s), I have one to counter you right back. :) I may have no programming experience whatsoever, but what I DO have, is gaming and testing experience up the @$$. I enjoy these things you see, and really, I want my ideas to be known by the devs because most of them have extremely high potential. Especially this one. I mean, hell, if someone wanted to use the top turret as a secondary bombing opportunity, they couldn't even if they flew upside-down because guess what, this aircraft will not be able to have the Bulldog! :D! And, due to the aircraft's non-VTOL flight, it's capabilities are also limited.

You asked me to explain a new role to fulfill, and I delivered. How do you like me now? ;) :)

[blampoet]

How about referring back to my response where I said that it could be used for fighting in between continents if they ever DO link them together by one gigantic sea? It's been said before that they may want to eventually do that and completely eliminate loading screens. IF they do this, and I heavily mean IF, this fighter could have a new role fulfilled due to its speed and non-VTOL, fighting in the skies between continents and faster transport between continents. :P




Edit: countermeasures for this "OP" aircraft would be extremely easy to implement compared to other things, such as the following:

Sunderers: add a cert tree for a bubble shield that will take the place of AMS, GSD, IR Smoke, etc. Its first cost would be about 150-200 certs. General size would be about 20 meters or so, only enough to fit very few vehicles inside. It will have a deploy circle around it similar to the AMS to prevent spamming. It will only last for about 5-10 seconds (maybe more) and have a cool-down of possibly 1:30-2:00+ to further prevent spamming. Further certification could allow for a longer time of it being deployed and/or the shield being able to take more damage. Think of it as a temporary warpgate-type-of-shield that can ONLY be used by Sundies.
Galaxy: Could POSSIBLY have the same thing, MAYBE! More likely not, due to "OP AS F*CK!" being screamed.

The reasoning behind this shield is due to the new fighter-bomber combination having bombs. Of course, the amount of bombs it would be able to carry would be EXTREMELY limited (only about 2-3 tank buster bombs and 1-2 cluster bombs that have to be released at a certain height or above or they will not break apart and do their job). One would not be able to cert into the amount of bombs, but allow for different variations of these bombs, such as 1-2 EMP bombs and/or 2-3 napalm bombs. The fighter-bombers will only be able to carry one type at a time and the types of bombs can only be switched out by spawning a new aircraft.

Naturally, the hit points of this aircraft will be either equal to or less than that of an ESF due to its high-caliber damage capabilities. We don't want them to be damn near invincible AND fast, now do we? ;)

Also, I would like to add that the aircraft will only be able to carry a Drake or a Walker as it's turreted gun and only a Vector or one similar to the Reaver's main gun (the M20 Mustang) as its main gun for the pilot. Maybe other types of weapons, but none like the Tank Buster on the Liberators. Now THAT would OP as F*ck IMHO. Keep in mind, there is NO tail gunner, only a top gunner. The aircraft would have NO VTOL more than likely so it would be EXTREMELY vulnerable to attacks from underneath and behind. Any attacks met from above could potentially end in a deadly result for the attacking aircraft. This aircraft could also become the potential bomber for Planetside 2 as the Liberator is more of a gunship than a bomber, it has no bombs, after all! IMHO, it's really just a VTOL C-130 Spectre of sorts. Planetside 2 could really use an actual BOMBER at one point or another, and this could be it! Granted, the devs COULD make it VTOL, but it could be labeled as OP because it would be able to resupply mid-flight by hovering next to an ammo Galaxy. When in reality, it should only be able to resupply at a landing strip of sorts. sure, it could resupply by flying past a Galaxy, but it would need to make several passes to do so. And, without an extremely skilled pilot, it could have a deadly and disastrous end result due to a crash from one flying into the other. You see, to every counter to have to my idea(s), I have one to counter you right back. :) I may have no programming experience whatsoever, but what I DO have, is gaming and testing experience up the @$$. I enjoy these things you see, and really, I want my ideas to be known by the devs because most of them have extremely high potential. Especially this one. I mean, hell, if someone wanted to use the top turret as a secondary bombing opportunity, they couldn't even if they flew upside-down because guess what, this aircraft will not be able to have the Bulldog! :D! And, due to the aircraft's non-VTOL flight, it's capabilities are also limited.

You asked me to explain a new role to fulfill, and I delivered. How do you like me now? ;) :)

ok,
first- your answer could really use a TL;DR

second- I like the way you make a difference between a gunship and a bomber. I'm not sure how valid that is, but it is interesting. Tt would create a different gaming experience.

third- I still think a VTOL fighter/bomber would be too close to the ESF to be considered a "different vehicle". I just don't see why anybody would pull an ESF after this vehicle would be created. People will give CAS with the lib, and air-air would be the fast jet. A non-VTOL is what i suggested in the link in one of my earlier messages (again, i guess you didnt read)

fourth- I suggested the shield in the CSP in my sig, but i guess you're more a rambler than a reader.

fifth- water is so far away, it's not even funny.

six- i'd like you better if you responded to what was written instead of going on a length trumpet. we both want the same thing though, I just dont see you trying to solve the problems I'm presenting (unless you dont consider them valid problems, which is legitimate, but it'd be nice if you said why)

[HiroshiChugi]

I just don't think a lot of problems people present with air are valid problems. If it's a problem to make this vehicle non-VTOL or VTOL, make it STOL. That's Short Take Off and Landing for people that don't know. It's perfect for tech plant runways and Warpgates. I apologize for not reading your signature link, I don't really look at signatures much anymore. I don't want to sound cynical or narcissistic or anything, I just think that if I could 5 minutes, max., with the devs and this idea, I'm pretty sure that I can get it implemented, just like any other idea. It's just a matter of slight rebuttal on each side that would need to be fixed/solved.

[Sirrace]

I just don't think a lot of problems people present with air are valid problems. If it's a problem to make this vehicle non-VTOL or VTOL, make it STOL. That's Short Take Off and Landing for people that don't know. It's perfect for tech plant runways and Warpgates. I apologize for not reading your signature link, I don't really look at signatures much anymore. I don't want to sound cynical or narcissistic or anything, I just think that if I could 5 minutes, max., with the devs and this idea, I'm pretty sure that I can get it implemented, just like any other idea. It's just a matter of slight rebuttal on each side that would need to be fixed/solved.

Hiroshi, I'm going to give you a quick perspective. Like you, I love thinking of content for video games; however, I think you're letting your vision skew reality.

While you may have passion and the heart to see your idea through, it's not realistic. Saying "If I could have 5 minutes with the devs then I could get this idea implemented" is very shortsighted. Do you have any idea how video game development works? I'm on a development team (not game-related, but the methodology is the same) and I'll tell you what it's like.

A lot of your ideas call for significant changes in the way the game is played. That means the code needs to be developed and then tested and then implemented. All of that takes time and all of that costs money. Furthermore, much of your idea has the game change to suit your single fighter idea, instead of approaching your idea where it meshes well with the existing game. That's never a good design decision unless your program needs a significant redesign. I know it's fun to think of some really interesting and different ideas and I won't tell you to stop as that's still an enjoyable exercise, but if your goal is to get your idea implemented---which the company already hires people to do---then you should start thinking of realistic approaches.

Companies don't make changes to a game and then simply hope it works out. That's why Blampoet kept reiterating that the devs "don't want to add vehicles that don't do something completely different." Why? Because if it doesn't add a lot to the game (entice people to play) then they've wasted a lot of time, effort, and money. It'as a bad business decision.

In the end, I would LOVE a two-seater fighter jet or a bomber or anything in addition to what we have currently. I'm a content whore, give me moar. It's certainly possible that something like that would be implemented in the future, but I doubt multiple aspects of the game would change to revolve around a single vehicle.

Keep up what you're doing, but instead of thinking "how can PS2 change to suit my idea?" think instead in terms of "how can I enhance PS2 with my idea without changing core gameplay?" E.g. no STOL or fixed-wing aircraft, no changes to the way ESF or lib works now, and no terrain modifications. Your aim is to add something that brings significant value for as little change to the game as possible.

[HiroshiChugi]

Hiroshi, I'm going to give you a quick perspective. Like you, I love thinking of content for video games; however, I think you're letting your vision skew reality.

While you may have passion and the heart to see your idea through, it's not realistic. Saying "If I could have 5 minutes with the devs then I could get this idea implemented" is very shortsighted. Do you have any idea how video game development works? I'm on a development team (not game-related, but the methodology is the same) and I'll tell you what it's like.

A lot of your ideas call for significant changes in the way the game is played. That means the code needs to be developed and then tested and then implemented. All of that takes time and all of that costs money. Furthermore, much of your idea has the game change to suit your single fighter idea, instead of approaching your idea where it meshes well with the existing game. That's never a good design decision unless your program needs a significant redesign. I know it's fun to think of some really interesting and different ideas and I won't tell you to stop as that's still an enjoyable exercise, but if your goal is to get your idea implemented---which the company already hires people to do---then you should start thinking of realistic approaches.

Companies don't make changes to a game and then simply hope it works out. That's why Blampoet kept reiterating that the devs "don't want to add vehicles that don't do something completely different." Why? Because if it doesn't add a lot to the game (entice people to play) then they've wasted a lot of time, effort, and money. It'as a bad business decision.

In the end, I would LOVE a two-seater fighter jet or a bomber or anything in addition to what we have currently. I'm a content whore, give me moar. It's certainly possible that something like that would be implemented in the future, but I doubt multiple aspects of the game would change to revolve around a single vehicle.

Keep up what you're doing, but instead of thinking "how can PS2 change to suit my idea?" think instead in terms of "how can I enhance PS2 with my idea without changing core gameplay?" E.g. no STOL or fixed-wing aircraft, no changes to the way ESF or lib works now, and no terrain modifications. Your aim is to add something that brings significant value for as little change to the game as possible.

I understand what you're saying completely, but I can't help but wonder, wouldn't it be extremely overpowered if it could just sit there and hover next to an ammo Galaxy and constantly drop bombs in the same location? Just wondering here, albeit I understand fully what you have said.

[MrMak]

I understand what you're saying completely, but I can't help but wonder, wouldn't it be extremely overpowered if it could just sit there and hover next to an ammo Galaxy and constantly drop bombs in the same location? Just wondering here, albeit I understand fully what you have said.

I simple solution would be to make a bomber HAVE TO move in order to drop bombs. Also making its hover jets too unstable to keep on target when stationary or moving slow.

[HiroshiChugi]

I simple solution would be to make a bomber HAVE TO move in order to drop bombs. Also making its hover jets too unstable to keep on target when stationary or moving slow.

That makes sense. o.o But how would they be able to know where the bombs drop? I don't know how and/or why I'm just now thinking of this...