Crashing Aircraft

[LordReaver]

One of the things I loved about early PS, was when you got shot down out of the sky, you didn't blow up. You literally got SHOW DOWN OUT OF THE SKY! You would lose control of your aircraft, and then it would veer downwards, and crash into the ground. I miss that, I hope it's in PS2!

I think the only reason it was removed from PS1, was because it was a lazy fix to solve people being denied kill credits.

[ArcIyte]

Hopefully pilots will have to choose between ejection seats and advanced weapons. You can either have moderate firepower and the safety of a bail function or be a more powerful dedicated pilot and go down with your craft.

[Stardouser]

I've often thought that things like ejection seats, flares, smoke for tanks, etc, were basic features that a vehicle should always have and shouldn't be subject to unlocks or choosing it over some other thing.

[ArcIyte]

If you give everyone the ability to bail out of their aircraft, they will. I think we can all agree that skeets and reavers were the most powerful vehicles in the game not just due to their offensive strength, but also the fact that they were the best mode of transport in the game.

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by ArcIyte

If you give everyone the ability to bail out of their aircraft, they will. I think we can all agree that skeets and reavers were the most powerful vehicles in the game not just due to their offensive strength, but also the fact that they were the best mode of transport in the game.

I don't really understand why it's a get out of death free card. You're not invincible while parachuting, nor when you reach the ground. And most aircraft easily hover, so it's not like Battlefield, where if an enemy jet shoots you down, his speed is going to carry him past you after you bail. And really, people shouldn't be using fighters as transports, so that brings us back to the Pilot Kit. Upon entering aircraft as pilot(or gunner for something like Liberators), you are stripped of everything but a pistol and basic medpac.

That more than anything else could encourage proper use of vehicles.

[ArcIyte]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

I don't really understand why it's a get out of death free card. You're not invincible while parachuting, nor when you reach the ground. And most aircraft easily hover, so it's not like Battlefield, where if an enemy jet shoots you down, his speed is going to carry him past you after you bail. And really, people shouldn't be using fighters as transports, so that brings us back to the Pilot Kit. Upon entering aircraft as pilot(or gunner for something like Liberators), you are stripped of everything but a pistol and basic medpac.

That more than anything else could encourage proper use of vehicles.

I think my idea is far less complicated and also promotes better gameplay.

Letting players to choose between using their aircraft as a tool or dedicating themselves as a pilot is good to have. I think specialization v.s. utility is a spectrum we should be able to explore with our unlocks.

Disabling an enemy aircraft and watching them plummet down was cool, but you never saw it happen because you had to finish them off or they would just jump out. Nothing shrivels my dick faster than outmaneuvering an enemy pilot, only to have him bail. I would be fine with it if he had to choose between rocket pods/flares/AA missiles/whatever or bailing to survive.

[Bags]

Er, I don't recall that ever happening in PS1.

[Saieno]

Originally Posted by Bags

Er, I don't recall that ever happening in PS1.

Actually I remember aircraft in Planetside one being able to crash to the ground and systems would malfunction. While you were flying if you took enough damage, your weapons wouldn't fire, it would start to smoke, and if you took even more damage you would lose control of the vehicle and it would hurtle to the ground.

[Snipefrag]

Originally Posted by Bags

Er, I don't recall that ever happening in PS1.

Early on it did exactly that, you got to a point where you could no longer control your vehicle and you would crash into the ground. People bitched about it because it would deprive them of kills (if they died from the crash it would just give the suicide icon and no kill), so instead of the devs changing it so the last person who got the shot got the kill they just made it so you maintained control untill you died.

I hope they make it as i said above, you lose control of the vehicle and crash to the ground like the old way but the last person who got a shot off on the vehicle gets the kill.

[Stardouser]

You mean letting people choose between abusing aircraft or dedicating themselves as a pilot? Obviously they are not going to take the even slightly more complex route in order to "appeal to the majority" but that doesn't make it the right thing to do.

I hate to say it but this is not a duel simulator. People bail. Irreparably harming other balances so that people can enjoy seeing the other guy burn up unable to bail is hardly the right way to do it. And that doesn't even have anything to do with using aircraft as personal transports.

Gameplay should be designed to be balanced as it is at all times. All vehicles should have what they are supposed to have at all times. The only difference is that if you want to load up on air to air missiles instead of air to ground rockets, you do that as necessary. But flares, and the ability to bail, is standard issue. Choosing a fighter instead of a bomber is where the choice comes into play, vehicle unlocks aren't the way to do it.

[ArcIyte]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

You mean letting people choose between abusing aircraft or dedicating themselves as a pilot? Obviously they are not going to take the even slightly more complex route in order to "appeal to the majority" but that doesn't make it the right thing to do.

lolwut? are you agreeing or disagreeing with me?

I hate to say it but this is not a duel simulator. People bail. Irreparably harming other balances so that people can enjoy seeing the other guy burn up unable to bail is hardly the right way to do it. And that doesn't even have anything to do with using aircraft as personal transports.

Duel simulator? Maybe you should stick to what I'm saying and leave the assumptions at the door. Again, you fail to make a point.

Gameplay should be designed to be balanced as it is at all times. All vehicles should have what they are supposed to have at all times. The only difference is that if you want to load up on air to air missiles instead of air to ground rockets, you do that as necessary. But flares, and the ability to bail, is standard issue. Choosing a fighter instead of a bomber is where the choice comes into play, vehicle unlocks aren't the way to do it.

It's not going to be balanced at all times. How can it? Or even should it? What is your definition of balance? To give every vehicle the same thing? Sounds like homogenization. Games are better when players are given the freedom to customize themselves, which is the exact opposite of what you propose.

If you're going to give all aircraft the ability to bail, why not give that to tanks as well? Wouldn't that be "balanced"?

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by ArcIyte

Duel simulator? Maybe you should stick to what I'm saying and leave the assumptions at the door. Again, you fail to make a point.



It's not going to be balanced at all times. How can it? Or even should it? What is your definition of balance? To give every vehicle the same thing? Sounds like homogenization. Games are better when players are given the freedom to customize themselves, which is the exact opposite of what you propose.

If you're going to give all aircraft the ability to bail, why not give that to tanks as well? Wouldn't that be "balanced"?

I'm not assuming, you stated pretty clearly that you didn't want people to bail so that you could get your kill. And that is an attitude that reminds me of dueling, where you expect your opponent to stick around and die.

Having a few pieces of standard equipment is not homogenization. Some things lend themselves to always being equipped. This is one of them. And vehicles more than anything else lend themselves to having standardized equipment. Choosing between weapons/functions and the pretty video game standard of bailing is ridiculous, I'm sorry to say. And yes, being able to bail from aircraft is pretty much standard for video games. I'm frankly amazed at the KDR philosophy I'm seeing here, I thought you guys were a little different.

And yes, tanks need the ability as well. Except we call it "climbing out".

[ArcIyte]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

I'm not assuming, you stated pretty clearly that you didn't want people to bail so that you could get your kill. And that is an attitude that reminds me of dueling, where you expect your opponent to stick around and die.

Having a few pieces of standard equipment is not homogenization. Some things lend themselves to always being equipped. This is one of them. And vehicles more than anything else lend themselves to having standardized equipment. Choosing between weapons/functions and the pretty video game standard of bailing is ridiculous, I'm sorry to say. And yes, being able to bail from aircraft is pretty much standard for video games. I'm frankly amazed at the KDR philosophy I'm seeing here, I thought you guys were a little different.

It has less to do with KDR philosophy and more to do with getting rid of lame arcade-style gameplay. I don't want people to use aircraft like they did in PS1 and BF3. IE: Using the most powerful vehicles in the game, only to bail out of them when it comes time to die. The only other vehicles to get that luxury were open-topped, and it was fair because they weren't all that strong.

I think that if you get into a vehicle, specifically strong vehicles like reavers and tanks, you should be committed to it. Getting out should require you to land/park.

And yes, tanks need the ability as well. Except we call it "climbing out".

No, it wouldn't be "climbing out". A fair comparison would be an ejection seat that throws you safely away from the explosion. Now imagine everyone has it. How lame would that be?

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by ArcIyte

It has less to do with KDR philosophy and more to do with getting rid of lame arcade-style gameplay. I don't want people to use aircraft like they did in PS1 and BF3. IE: Using the most powerful vehicles in the game, only to bail out of them when it comes time to die. The only other vehicles to get that luxury were open-topped, and it was fair because they weren't all that strong.

I think that if you get into a vehicle, specifically strong vehicles like reavers and tanks, you should be committed to it. Getting out should require you to land/park.



No, it wouldn't be "climbing out". A fair comparison would be an ejection seat that throws you safely away from the explosion. Now imagine everyone has it. How lame would that be?

An ejection seat wouldn't be lame at all, it would be authentic. NOT that I want to bring realism/authenticity into it, but if you're going to call bailing out arcade style gameplay, then that, to me, is the same as saying you want realism. And an ejection seat is realism. I'm only saying that in truth, not because I want realism.

What do you think of this system:
Put in a formal ejection seat that propels the pilot up and away from aircraft and automatically deploys a parachute. See, in Battlefield, you can hide after you bail by waiting til you're 20 feet off the ground to pop your chute. So let's remove that, and make the parachute automatic. And the ejection seat should be twice the size of the pilot, providing a juicy target for tanks and aircraft(ie, heavy weapons like tank cannons and jet cannons only have to hit the seat to kill him, not the pilot). Yet it isn't armored, so infantry can hit the pilot too on his way down.

AND, here's the really nice bit about my idea: if you do not eject before your vehicle reaches 20% health(maybe even 30%), after that, it is considered to be disabled by damage, and won't work. Therefore, you either have to make a decision to give up the fight early, which many people will be loathe to do, or you die. That would add commitment I think...

And I still say, independent of this issue, that we should discourage using fighters and bombers as transports by using Pilot crew kits armed only with pistol. Additionally, if people aren't carrying their normal light assault rifle, they will be less likely to bail in hopes of continuing to fight on the ground.

Originally Posted by ArcIyte

To be fair I'm using PS1 and BF3 as comparisons. Hopefully the resource system really punishes you for losing such a strong vehicle. I would be ok with knocking out an aircraft if I knew they wouldn't simply get another one as soon as they respawned.

I would like to see a system where you can get a partial resource refund if you return to base...of course the question becomes, why would anyone return to base? Still, it's a thought.

[Baneblade]

The easy fix to bailures in PS2 (and PS1 tbfh) would be to simply not allow a pilot to bail until their aircraft are below a certain threshold of hp.

I've always said, that you shouldn't be able to bail until your bailing mechanism had a chance to fail. Well they added the chance to fail part, but not the first part.