Originally Posted by Toastyz
I think this is a great idea. I dont understand why people hate it so much. If you get killed by artillery, then you know not to go that way and go around it to take it out (if that is what you are doing) its not like artillery is some sort of invincible death machine. I think that it must be lazed targets to fire, and the person lazing targets would not give a precise, pinpoint location. I think that the artillery would have a circular area where the person lazed the target, so they only have an idea of where they are firing. Hope this helps
|
It seems you are describing something like what I mentioned in my earlier post, something like a remote-fired artillery. So the only way to fire the weapon would be to have some form of confirmed targeting. By 'lazed' I assume you mean something like...let's cross genre's and say, Starcraft (1) Ghost laser? i.e. you have to sit there and point at the target for a while (line of sight) and then the artillery (or nuke, as was the case in SC1) would fire. That sounds similar to what I was suggesting, with an error margin for impact point, and such. A good method. A question would be, is the marking a visible or invisible process. If it's invisible, could something be certed to detect it?
Other ways of firing might be: a beacon that is planted ahead of time; or a tracking devices that could be fired, either at a location or attached to a vehicle. You can trigger the firing at that target beacon within some time frame. Five minutes or something. That could be interesting.
2012-08-01, 12:43 AM
Threaded Mode