problems
1, ambiguious aerodynamic and control model
Most of the flying and shooting games can be roughly divided into 2 categories: using "physical model" (in LO, IL2, or even MS FS and BF) or "direct control" (Ace Combat, or HAWX) . "physical model" means, anything you do is just a control to part of the aircraft itself, like you press a key which indicate "pull up", the direct effect is a state change of the elevator rudder on the tail, what's your plane going to do depends on the plane's speed, direction, Angle of attack, etc, and will be determined by an aerodynamic model. While in an "direct control", if you "pull up", the plane just pull toward the direction of its back, no matter what state it's in.
In PS2, it's kind of hybrid now, there is obviously some physical model, like if you lean forward and ascend in VTOL state, it will move forward, and, if you use afterburner, the direction your plane accelerate depends on the direction of the engine. But, if you are in a normal flying state, it's hardly to feel it, roll left 30 degree won't make the plane turn left even a bit, and the roll/pitch/yaw performance almost never changes no matter what flying state the plane is in. Most of the fancy maneuvers like High/Low-Yoyo, Immelmann Turn, Split-S, Barrel Roll, Scissors, etc, has no place to show in PS2. Now there are more physical model in VTOL (low speed) mode, so most air to air combat appears like helicopters shooting on each other.
2, No linear control of keyboard.
Due to the special nature of fly control, the response to input needs to be both subtle and rapid, means you can direct the plane's some control state to a certain proportion (like 30% of pitch performance in 0.2 second). So, this means the input should be translate into a certain real number varying over time rather than a binary state (full or nothing), see figures blow:
The red line indicates current control, the blue curve indicates a better model. The time "t0" could be used as an parameter of "keyboard sensitive of flying control".
3, Futile radar, map and HUD
It's hard to search enemies visually for a pilot who's in a faster-moving, half-closing cockpit, so the first mission of plane radar is search enemies and show them to the pilot - before the pilot see it by his own eyes. How ever the range of radar in PS2 is too short, no prewarnings when enemy approach. Besides, the map and HUD is not so usefull, see what a HUD looks like in reality or in other games:
So, the job of a HUD is to provide flying and combat information to the pilot, such as Speed, Altitude , Aspect of Angle, prediction of flying trajectory, aiming assistance, etc.
The 3rd image is from ACE COMBAT,see HUD (and map), the map indicates all radar visible enemies, as well as their directions, and it will automatically scale up or down according to the distance of current target. And, their is a big arrow in the HUD indicating the current target's direction. This HUD and map if very useful in a air-2-air fighting. Also, all the enemies in view is
tagged (otherwise can you specify them by your own eye?).
This image is from internet. Here the HUD even shows the target in a 3D style.
So, what does HUD in PS2 provides us? almost nothing.
4, AA Missiles as decoration.
The current AA Missile is totally useless. With long time of locking, only a little damage, in such a long time a missile using pilot can be shot down by a gun shooter of another fighter. Main fighters be killed by 3 missiles, bombers even more, so no one want to use A2A.
The problem is, what kind of missile do you want to design? Close range combat or long range suppression? Agile and quick or slow but powerful? Infrared-self guild or continuous radar guiding and semi-control? You need to have some design ideas first.
5, Exaggerating flares
Compared with A2A, the flares is too powerful. I understand the logic: G2A missiles makes great threat to planes, but such a buffed flare is not a good solution. see flares in reality:
They threw lots of flares in all direction and continuously, even so, this only provides them some possibility to avoid incoming missile, not a 8-second invisibility to missile!
To balance planes and G2A, just nerf G2A in speed, maximum flying range, tracking, and maneuverabilitys. And, more importantly, show missile trajectory in planes' radar map! This gives a chance to the pilot to avoid it.
=======================================
So, my suggestions:
1, Improve the aerodynamic model of planes, not flying as a UFO, but calculating lifting force, gravity, air resistance, and engine force all the time. Planes lose speed when climbing or turning, while gain speed when diving (if climb vertically without afterburner working, the plane eventually stalls); lose altitude when roll 90 degrees (and turn a bit even if not pull up), or even lose more when inverted; pull up should be much faster than pitch down as well as yaw left/right, etc. This makes a basis for energy-base dog fight, instead of a "helicopter shooting war".
2, Planes consumes fuel all the time, fuel with be recharged when return to plane resupply spot, together with ammo. Fuel is consumed even faster when afterburner is on (at least 10 times faster); afterburner not only consumes fuel but also gains heat for itself, when heat if full, it can't be activated until cool down. Afterburner creates extra infrared features which makes certain missiles easier to track it.
3, Set more types of missiles, like, radar guided VS infrared guided, A2A or A2G or G2A, short range VS long range, agile VS high damage, taking time to lock but self tracking after shoot VS
4, Add variable of "weight" to both aircrafts and part, weapons, ammo, etc. The more weight it carries, the more difficult it can maneuver, and the more fuel it consumes.
5, Separate the role of helicopters and fighter planes (Mosquito, Reaver, and Scythe) by 2 kind of engines: one can provide high speed, but consumes more fuel in VTOL mode (engine being vertical); one can provide greater force in low speed, as well as maintain altitude even in static state without afterburner for a long time, but can't achieve high speed, so can't enter a normal flying mode, only fly as a helicopter. The first one is fast, agile, can fly very high, but can't carry too much weight, and can't stay too long in a VTOL mode. Better to add a key to switch between VTOL mode and normal flying mode manually.
6, Add "radar" facility to some base, or towers, Nerf infantry AA weapons, but enhance them when they are in the Base Radar support range. This makes. In crease all anti-air missile (including A2A and G2A) weapon's tracking ability and locking range with a radar support. Also, add a optional radar part to Sunderer, and Galaxy (so Galaxy can perform like an AWACS), provide friendly fighter planes in range a better radar view, a faster lock on, and a better (radar based) missile tracking. But the mobile versions are not as powerful as a base version.
7, Electronic pod for Mosquito, Reaver, Scythe to replace current flare, 8 seconds invicible of missiles, or even more, but reduced when enemy have radar support, or even disrupt or attract enemy missile in a short range (to protect allies). This takes the second weapon slot.
8, Anti-radiation missile, lock on quickly, good power, mediate range, only attacks radar units.
See how many guns can be unlocked for infanty? Let's get more unlocking parts and weapons for aircrafts
2014-02-26, 08:37 PM
Re: the current design of aircrafts needs major changes
Linear Mode
