|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ulysses Knapse
Nuevo Atlas Corporation
220
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 19:40:00 -
[1] - Quote
This doesn't sound right. It sounds less like New Eden and more like something I don't recognize. |
Ulysses Knapse
Nuevo Atlas Corporation
220
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 22:07:00 -
[2] - Quote
Jakar Umbra wrote:Ulysses Knapse wrote:This doesn't sound right. It sounds less like New Eden and more like something I don't recognize. Perhaps you could elaborate on this, as I'm not quite sure what you mean. I'm new to New Eden myself, but what I understand it to be is a place full of politics, betrayal, wars, battles, alliances, grudges, plots and conspiracies. What we are talking about here are the tools by which to execute and maintain these things. At least that's what I understood New Eden to be. I'm talking about the aspect of it. The modules are so mundane, the skill progression is contrary to the norm, and it just seems... different to what I would imagine aerial vehicles to be. |
Ulysses Knapse
Nuevo Atlas Corporation
220
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 22:23:00 -
[3] - Quote
Ops Fox wrote:Ulysses Knapse wrote: I'm talking about the aspect of it. The modules are so mundane, the skill progression is contrary to the norm, and it just seems... different to what I would imagine aerial vehicles to be.
Flying warmachines? "Heavy Aircraft" - What is that? Wouldn't they be miniature versions of what MCCs should be? "Attackship" - Why have a separate version instead of just a class of dropship? "Fighters and Fighter Bombers" - Again, why not just have them be different classes of fighters?
And they aren't the most detailed, so I honestly can't tell what the author is trying to suggest here. |
Ulysses Knapse
Nuevo Atlas Corporation
223
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 03:39:00 -
[4] - Quote
Mobius Wyvern wrote:Ops Fox wrote:@Shouper
Gunships should be light aircraft not Heavy aircraft, that way they can stay closer to the infantry without being an easy target. If they were Heavy aircraft then their size and lock time(if different lock time is ever implemented) would make them poorly suited to staying near the ground to support infantry. A smaller Air to Ground vehicle would present a smaller target and could more easily maneuver around in tighter spaces infantry frequent like streets. If it was a heavy craft then it couldn't get as close increasing the change to miss your target. there also the fact that you want your gunship to be harder to detect so that way infantry can just take cover prepare for your arrival. Infantry will have more than enough firepower to tear anything out of the skies so trying to tank it is not a good idea, especially for a vehicle that has to actively be near hostile targets to work.
Fighter/bombers should be heavy so they can maximize the damage they do in a single strike and so they can more easily rule the skies. if a gunship was bigger than them then there is a change that a gunship could out do a fighter, which is bad for a fighter. I would personally figure that a Gunship would be a Light aircraft, Fighter a medium, and Attacker a Heavy. Kinda fits how those are sized IRL Not always true. Gunships are generally larger than Fighters because they don't need to be agile and need to carry more guns. Of course, that's the fixed-wing version, not the helicopter version. |
Ulysses Knapse
Bojo's School of the Trades
461
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 06:25:00 -
[5] - Quote
I remember this thread. It was awful before, and it still is. Unimaginative, with poor attention to detail.
If you are going to suggest something, it needs to be creative or well-designed. This thread lacks both qualities. |
|
|
|