Crashing Aircraft

[Pollo Jack]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

I know it isn't and that you don't have to wait for it to respawn. But everyone keeps bombarding me with immersion this, immersion that, and so I'm going to use it myself this time: Being able to unrealistically grab a jet fighter and use it as a personal taxi, or indeed, to have this done to you by the enemy, is immersion killing.

Here's another thought: If a player dies more than 10m away from their vehicle, and their vehicle is full health, they get charged double resources for the vehicle. That way, people who use aircraft as personal chariots like this, they can still do it, but at a cost. It will not affect people who bail from aircraft that's been damaged.

We didn't bow to immersion in PS and we don't have to in the sequel. A lot of the immersion and realism ideas simply don't make for a fun game. 1.5 km lock on missiles is realistic, dumb as hell in a game where the targeted firefights will be 0.050km. Sniping out treads was repeatedly suggested for snipers in PS but was never implemented as it would be super annoying, I can't kill your tank and you can't get to me so we will just sit and watch each other. Boomers used to activate each other when they exploded as you would expect multiple explosives to, but was removed as one person could drop three generators in under a minute. Immersion isn't bad, just don't limit yourself within it's confines.

With respect to realism, people respawn fifteen seconds after they die. I think they can create an aircraft with an equally small amount of effort. The biggest hit to realism and immersion I foresee will be ponies on the hoods of tanks.

Did you even play the original PS? Aircraft almost never had full health. Some jagoff lands on top of your mossie or pushes it off with their liberator. With physics this might be even worse, highby lost his own reaver to gravity after he landed in one of the clips.

There will already be a loss of resources when the aircraft is pulled and they will not be taking advantage of the potential resources if they bail requiring them to earn their resources back where someone that bought a mossie to kill infantry with would have a distinct advantage as they can use it grab some kills and then bail when low.

Which brings us back on topic.

Whatever the devs decide to do, ensure that the XP and credit for the vehicle destruction is given to whoever shot it in the last ten seconds. I would prefer a crash system when it hits zero that explodes after a few seconds. No bailing after 40% for the pilot and no bailing after 30% for the gunners. It would also be good to have it remember how many gunners the vehicle had and reward XP based on that too.

[DOUBLEXBAUGH]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

I know it isn't and that you don't have to wait for it to respawn. But everyone keeps bombarding me with immersion this, immersion that, and so I'm going to use it myself this time: Being able to unrealistically grab a jet fighter and use it as a personal taxi, or indeed, to have this done to you by the enemy, is immersion killing.

Its only unrealistic in modern times as planes cost a lot and require manufacturing times. In PS its the future and everything is made almost instantly by nanites for a few resources.

[Ale]

I just wanted to point out that any restriction placed on players bailing out of aircraft, including the mechanic that the OP is on about, has been, and will continue to be, the direct result of forum QQ.

What would I bind to Mouse 5, if not bail? *boggle*

[Neksar]

Pfft. If we wanna talk about realism (and maybe immersion, though that's irrelevant) then the idea of an ejection seat that doesn't work when your plane is damaged makes very little sense. Tracking vehicle kills separately from player kills doesn't solve the problem for the statwhoring masses, since all we'll hear about is how their air-to-air kills aren't affecting their K/D. On the other hand, and this goes back to my first statement, there's little point in having a bailing mechanic if you can't use it when your aircraft is sufficiently damaged. At that point, the bailing mechanic is *only* useful if you want to use the aircraft to get from A to B.

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by Pollo Jack

We didn't bow to immersion in PS and we don't have to in the sequel. A lot of the immersion and realism ideas simply don't make for a fun game. 1.5 km lock on missiles is realistic, dumb as hell in a game where the targeted firefights will be 0.050km. Sniping out treads was repeatedly suggested for snipers in PS but was never implemented as it would be super annoying, I can't kill your tank and you can't get to me so we will just sit and watch each other. Boomers used to activate each other when they exploded as you would expect multiple explosives to, but was removed as one person could drop three generators in under a minute. Immersion isn't bad, just don't limit yourself within it's confines.

Realism is never a good reason to have something or not. And on that point, I did not suggest radar missiles for realism, but for the layer they would add to the game. If I were looking for realism, you'd have 50km lock ranges.

The only reason radar missiles might not make sense is due to the game world size being still too small for it.

[Kipper]

I also think people taking vehicles just for taxi-transport and not using them properly is silly, for the record.

In games like Battlefield where there are a finite amount of vehicles active at one time, its downright rude & annoying. But in PS2, it will probably just max out at 'silly' - since your pulling a vehicle to waste will not affect my ability to get one.

That said, if you have to collect resources to pull vehicles, and you then go and completely waste those vehicles without earning their cost back (or trying to) - and assuming resources will be an issue and not something that you have so many of so as to be of no concern - then people doing this will be just as silly as the thing that they're doing, and will no doubt find themselves without the ability to pull vehicles as often as they might like!

[lolroflroflcake]

While I agree that people using aircraft simply for point A to B transport then bailing out over their destination is a bad thing. There is one thing to consider about bailing, aircraft are highly visible to everyone in their area at all times and can be shot at by anyone who damn well pleases to, where as on the ground even tanks have quite a few options to escape hostile fire and are never really exposed to the entire battlefield simultaneously like aircraft are.

This is not the case in terms of aircraft, more often then not everyone can see you on a given battlefield unless they are inside a building and most can shoot at you if they choose to and yet you only really have one option to escape, Turn tail and run. Bailing balances out this short coming by providing one other escape option at rather heavy cost.

Really it is only fair that we be allowed to at least attempt to escape an aircraft that is clearly going down in a ball of flaming wreckage.

[MrBloodworth]

Originally Posted by Bags

I've never had that happen or seen it happen and I played from 2006 to 2011...

You didn't play during prime.