Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
PSU: Why does Hamma hate me?
Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
Home | Forum | Chat | Wiki | Social | AGN | PS2 Stats |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
2003-03-26, 03:27 PM | [Ignore Me] #17 | ||
First Sergeant
|
I wouldnt want a dark period to be every day or so, that way as Unico says it would become predictable and boring in my opinion, however darkness should be at irregular times (in the short run, but with a pattern over longer periods) that way (as I see it) when darkness is forcast you would get some really tense times waiting for an expected attack.
Picture the scene, the last 3 darkness tiems had passed with little or no action. It is a hour or so until dark fall and outfits, platoons, commanders etc. are all rushing around to finalise their defence perimiters (it would be theoretical suicide to ignore the fact that an attacker would have a major advantage at night and not prepare) Therefore having taken positions, or having setup and automated perimiter you wait patiently. Activity detected by a remote sensor on one side, then activity on the other. Then you realise they're all around you outside your visual range. Who are they? what are they? how many? that way recon would be needed, to find any build up of forces nearby before dark falls commanders would then really show what they are made of. what do you do, do you fall back inside the base, charge with a counter offensive? withdraw and leave a few stealthed people? simply riddle the area with fire? it would make a nice change from constant melees, defending after hacking, transporting etc. anyone caught out in the open by themselves may not find it easyat night all in my opinion however of course there maybe the possibility that everyone simply defends, booooring! but due to the fact that night battles would have more CEP's or BEP's available and as said before you will get the creation of "night hawks" as I like to think of them as I'm trying to imagine it in my head, but it is hard not having played it |
||
|
2003-03-26, 03:42 PM | [Ignore Me] #19 | |||
Sergeant Major
|
__________________
|
|||
|
2003-03-26, 03:50 PM | [Ignore Me] #20 | |||
First Sergeant
|
|
|||
|
2003-03-26, 04:41 PM | [Ignore Me] #23 | |||
First Sergeant
|
you'd have to plan operations with this in mind, dont want to be transporting a large platoon somewhere as darkness falls |
|||
|
2003-03-26, 10:49 PM | [Ignore Me] #26 | |||
|
||||
|
2003-03-27, 01:34 PM | [Ignore Me] #28 | ||
Sergeant Major
|
What I really wonder is, is there a 1-to-1 correspondence between those clouds that we see on the command map view, and the actual storms. I would imagine that those systems don't just sit there, that they move -- and it would look fake if they just drifted one way without swirling etc.
The server could be running a very complex cloud/weather simulation, and of course the client only has to know if it's dark/rainy in his area or not. But as far as those clouds being displayed on the client machine from the overhead map view, I'm wondering how they're doing that.
__________________
|
||
|
2003-03-27, 02:23 PM | [Ignore Me] #30 | ||
Contributor Old War Horse
|
To piggyback what Hamma is saying and add a little detail on the weather patterns:
The huge systems are color coded, as Hamma said, red being worse. They are slow moving as real weather and the will affect some ops in the area of the storm. Flying through one of these storms in mountainous terrain can ruin a squad's day real quick. Visibility is greatly reduced in a cloud bank.
__________________
Manitou "On the plains of hesitation lie the bones of countless millions who, upon the dawn of victory, sat down to rest and resting, died." <))>< |
||
|
|
Bookmarks |
|
|