DUST Search - [Suggestion/Request] "Jet" Classifications and Capabilities.

Conraire wrote:

I'm thinking what fighters and aircraft in this game would be. Would be more like what you see in cyberpunk, with the vectored thrust vehicles. Imagine something like a real world Comanche attack helicoptor with no Rotor blades, and slight wings. Thats the best example I can think off the top of my head.

Matobar wrote:

In my mind, I think the best solution would be for the aircraft to occupy the same space as the ground forces, but to be "higher up," as it were. For example, on a given battlefield, the ground forces and dropships would occupy the "bottom rung" of the theater, taking over objectives as normal. But the fighters would be higher up, several hundred meters above the dropship's height ceiling. While there, they engage enemy fighters and try to destroy the long-range bombers (HACs) that can wreak havoc on the ground, but not to the extent of a precision strike. The fighters would also have the opportunity to destroy the RDVs that bring in vehicles, as they would pass through the "upper rung" occupied by the fighters and bombers before reaching the ground forces. If a team of fighters is good enough, they can completely cripple an enemy team's ability to use vehicle assets, while ensuring theirs are safely delivered to their allies down below. Another aspect of this would be a team's ability to request "air support" on a specific target. In my mind, this would allow a fighter to temporarily penetrate the height ceiling and take out say, a troublesome dropship that is harassing its teammates. Once the target is destroyed, the fighter must then return to the proper altitude or else blow up.

Pages: 1 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Mobius Wyvern BetaMax. 1216	Posted - 2012.10.25 05:00:00 - [1] - Quote I see it like this: You'd refer to them as Combat Aircraft, allowing them to follow the same nomenclature we currently have for ground vehicles. LCA would be about the size of a P-51, like the Gallente aircraft showed in the FanFest 2009 stage demo. HCA would be about the size of the hypothesized FB-22 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FB-22) MCA would be sized in between those. They could be fit for either an air-to-air or air-to-ground roles, or even a combination of the two at the expense of less variety of weapons carried for each based on limited slots, same as ground vehicles. Thus, you have aircraft that do whatever the pilot needs them to do thanks to be just as flexible as their ground counterparts will eventually be. Now, in addition, one of my first conversations on IRC involved a very enjoyable brainstorming session with Grit_Breather, who came up with an ambitious and brilliant idea for the implementation of these aircraft. If you had the chance to look at the districts from orbit when EVE was still connected to Singularity, you probably noticed that they are massive, far large than even the fully zoomed out maps we can see from the spawn overview in-game. Grit_Breather had the idea that while infantry and vehicles are restricted to one redzone, and VTOL aircraft to another, that Combat Aircraft, as I'll call them now, would have free reign of the entire district based on being calculated independently of the action on the ground in any of the combat zones. This would give them enough room to move around, while allowing multiple teams to coordinate air support with each other, and would additionally better allow them to engage carrier Figther Drones from EVE, which are suggested as a possible support asset by the Future Vision trailer from FanFest 2011. I realize this probably sounds pretty complex, but the gameplay it would provide would be revolutionary to say the least.
Ten-Sidhe Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 414	Posted - 2012.10.25 09:54:00 - [2] - Quote The rdv that brings in tanks is a medium aircraft, so I figure a heavy aircraft must be bomber size. So are eve fighters, so they may be what the heavy aircraft icon is for. I am hoping for dropship directed thrust combined with aerodynamic control surfaces, so height can be traded for speed and momentum maintained in turns at high speed. low speed they would behave almost identical to dropship.
Mobius Wyvern BetaMax. 1216	Posted - 2012.10.25 16:07:00 - [3] - Quote Ten-Sidhe wrote: The rdv that brings in tanks is a medium aircraft, so I figure a heavy aircraft must be bomber size. So are eve fighters, so they may be what the heavy aircraft icon is for. I am hoping for dropship directed thrust combined with aerodynamic control surfaces, so height can be traded for speed and momentum maintained in turns at high speed. low speed they would behave almost identical to dropship. EVE Fighters are actually supposed to be far bigger than what their image makes it appear they are. I'm pretty sure they'll be AI controlled ground-attack platforms while we'll be able to use smaller aircraft to intercept them or provide our own close-air-support.
Matobar Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz RISE of LEGION 123	Posted - 2012.10.25 17:59:00 - [4] - Quote In my mind, I think the best solution would be for the aircraft to occupy the same space as the ground forces, but to be "higher up," as it were. For example, on a given battlefield, the ground forces and dropships would occupy the "bottom rung" of the theater, taking over objectives as normal. But the fighters would be higher up, several hundred meters above the dropship's height ceiling. While there, they engage enemy fighters and try to destroy the long-range bombers (HACs) that can wreak havoc on the ground, but not to the extent of a precision strike. The fighters would also have the opportunity to destroy the RDVs that bring in vehicles, as they would pass through the "upper rung" occupied by the fighters and bombers before reaching the ground forces. If a team of fighters is good enough, they can completely cripple an enemy team's ability to use vehicle assets, while ensuring theirs are safely delivered to their allies down below. Another aspect of this would be a team's ability to request "air support" on a specific target. In my mind, this would allow a fighter to temporarily penetrate the height ceiling and take out say, a troublesome dropship that is harassing its teammates. Once the target is destroyed, the fighter must then return to the proper altitude or else blow up.
Conraire Zumari Force Projection Caldari State 52	Posted - 2012.10.25 19:52:00 - [5] - Quote I'm thinking what fighters and aircraft in this game would be. Would be more like what you see in cyberpunk, with the vectored thrust vehicles. Imagine something like a real world Comanche attack helicoptor with no Rotor blades, and slight wings. Thats the best example I can think off the top of my head.
Mobius Wyvern BetaMax. 1216	Posted - 2012.10.25 21:24:00 - [6] - Quote Conraire wrote: I'm thinking what fighters and aircraft in this game would be. Would be more like what you see in cyberpunk, with the vectored thrust vehicles. Imagine something like a real world Comanche attack helicoptor with no Rotor blades, and slight wings. Thats the best example I can think off the top of my head. That sounds more like a gunship, which I think they already have in the works. Matobar wrote: In my mind, I think the best solution would be for the aircraft to occupy the same space as the ground forces, but to be "higher up," as it were. For example, on a given battlefield, the ground forces and dropships would occupy the "bottom rung" of the theater, taking over objectives as normal. But the fighters would be higher up, several hundred meters above the dropship's height ceiling. While there, they engage enemy fighters and try to destroy the long-range bombers (HACs) that can wreak havoc on the ground, but not to the extent of a precision strike. The fighters would also have the opportunity to destroy the RDVs that bring in vehicles, as they would pass through the "upper rung" occupied by the fighters and bombers before reaching the ground forces. If a team of fighters is good enough, they can completely cripple an enemy team's ability to use vehicle assets, while ensuring theirs are safely delivered to their allies down below. Another aspect of this would be a team's ability to request "air support" on a specific target. In my mind, this would allow a fighter to temporarily penetrate the height ceiling and take out say, a troublesome dropship that is harassing its teammates. Once the target is destroyed, the fighter must then return to the proper altitude or else blow up. See, the thing is I don't think they should be typecast for one role, as the eventual idea for the vehicles we have now is for them to be able to occupy multiple different roles if you want them to. If the only classification is by size, you can set them up for close air support or interception just based on your preference, or maybe even a combination of the two. As to forcing altitude restrictions, they've already done that with a flight ceiling for dropships, and I've yet to hear anyone praise that, since the lower ceiling doesn't matter with swarms still being unable to hit them. I was actually out pressure-washing the mildew off the wooden playset in our backyard, and I had some further ideas: On certain types of amphibious ships, you have a helicopter deck on the top of the ship, and a large rear bay that opens out onto the ocean for deploying landing craft. If our MCCs are intended to be as large as that DevBlog made them sound, I would say that you would give them an air-deck on top for deploying both CAs and VTOLs, and then allow infantry to drop out the bottom and call in their ground vehicles via RDV. Aircraft could still be called in via RDV, but it wouldn't be a requirement. Now, a while back they instituted separate drone and fighter bays in carriers, and I would propose that for this. Say that you can only carry 8 people's CA fittings on one MCC. Thus, even with every battlefield in a district occupied, there's a cap on how many aircraft there are in the air. Now, as far as you were talking about with the altitude restrictions in separating them from ground forces, I would suggest having them be handled by a different server altogether. For the sake of speculation, lets say that CCP manages to pull off 256 players on a single large-scale battlefield within a district. Since we already know there'll be more than one battlefield per district, they would have to all be instanced onto separate servers. I would propose that you have another instance that runs just the airspace of the district, and communicates with the ground-based servers to the extent of allowing weapons usage. In addition, these pilots would be unable to land and rearm anywhere other than their starting MCC, thus preventing any issues with exceeding player counts on another server.
Conraire Zumari Force Projection Caldari State 52	Posted - 2012.10.28 06:38:00 - [7] - Quote Hmmm I think something cool multi-role wise would be something equivalent to the Drop ship, Bomber from the Aliens movie. Vectored thrust with the missile pod wings, nose gun, and ability to carrying the MAV troop transport in the hold.
Mobius Wyvern BetaMax. 1216	Posted - 2012.10.28 06:40:00 - [8] - Quote Conraire wrote: Hmmm I think something cool multi-role wise would be something equivalent to the Drop ship, Bomber from the Aliens movie. Vectored thrust with the missile pod wings, nose gun, and ability to carrying the MAV troop transport in the hold. Hell, I'd love a Heavy Dropship. I personally had in mind something like that quad-fan giant gunship thing from Avatar, but that'd be a pretty slick concept too.
Mobius Wyvern BetaMax. 1216	Posted - 2012.12.13 02:12:00 - [9] - Quote Was rolling through Deviant Art, and found this: http://flyingdebris.deviantart.com/gallery/?offset=48#/dubszh Looks curvy enough to be Gallente.


Pages: 1 :: [one page]