Upvote
0
Anti-tank guns
- Thread starter Divinity
- Start date
Fact is, most people who ask/think such things should be done are clueless about what it takes to make the models, code them, animate them, and most of all animate all the player models to work with mobile guns. It is just not worth it nor practical. Furthermore, how many players are going to spend their time pushing an AT gun around? In theory it's a nice idea but just not worth the effort to make a reality. The next best idea is to allow an SL or Commander pre-place them instead of random spawning, which I think was a great leap in dynamic mapping/play when we did that with Ramm's code support.
As far as HoS goes, portable mortars would serve a much better role than mobile AT guns with the focus more heavily on infantry actions. And as for community content, I just do not see much in the way of custom content to the extent RO:OST saw in vehicles and weapons. Things have changed immensely in how models are made/coded/animated and it will take far longer and far more experience than previously required. Level design will still be there but again, MUCH more complex and guys will have a LOT to learn and to configure just in technical terms, let alone figuring out the new SDK and new UT functions etc. So, bottom line, if you're curious about doing custom content, get on the ball now.
As far as HoS goes, portable mortars would serve a much better role than mobile AT guns with the focus more heavily on infantry actions. And as for community content, I just do not see much in the way of custom content to the extent RO:OST saw in vehicles and weapons. Things have changed immensely in how models are made/coded/animated and it will take far longer and far more experience than previously required. Level design will still be there but again, MUCH more complex and guys will have a LOT to learn and to configure just in technical terms, let alone figuring out the new SDK and new UT functions etc. So, bottom line, if you're curious about doing custom content, get on the ball now.
Upvote
0
Do i need to specify in every single post that the mine are only suppositions/ideas?
I think that everyone know that this require lot of hard work, noone denied this.
Upvote
0
At the very least, a fixed AT gun would be nice.
I dont care much for movable guns, it doesn't make a lot of sense anyways, but a fixed AT emplacement would be invaluable in both gameplay and for custom maps.
I dont care much for movable guns, it doesn't make a lot of sense anyways, but a fixed AT emplacement would be invaluable in both gameplay and for custom maps.
Upvote
0
Do i need to specify in every single post that the mine are only suppositions/ideas?
I think that everyone know that this require lot of hard work, noone denied this.
After years of mod work, including dozens of vehicles for several games, I am just stating the facts for folks out there that do assume too much.
Not saying it is you, specifically, generalized commentary for the public.
Upvote
0
There was a map in the mod that had static usable mortars, I believe it was called Tali-Ihantala (I might have spelled that wrong). Anyway, they were incredibly fun to use and really satisfying when you heard the *thoomp* sound and then listened for the shell to fall and noticed that you nailed a couple of guys
I think static AT guns (with HE) and Mortars would be a really cool inclusion to the game. Maybe there could be a maximum amount of shells available to each static weapon. It would be sweet, if using mortars, each motar had three possible landing 'zones' that the shells would randomly fall into (the landing zones would need to be relatively close to each other of course), so the enemy couldnt learn the exact landing spot of the shells and then just avoid that spot.
I wonder if this could be done without an extreme amount of coding (I'm talking mortars here); no animation of the avatar necessary, just walk up to it and press the use button, then a 5-8 second delay before you can shoot it again. Slyk?
I think static AT guns (with HE) and Mortars would be a really cool inclusion to the game. Maybe there could be a maximum amount of shells available to each static weapon. It would be sweet, if using mortars, each motar had three possible landing 'zones' that the shells would randomly fall into (the landing zones would need to be relatively close to each other of course), so the enemy couldnt learn the exact landing spot of the shells and then just avoid that spot.
I wonder if this could be done without an extreme amount of coding (I'm talking mortars here); no animation of the avatar necessary, just walk up to it and press the use button, then a 5-8 second delay before you can shoot it again. Slyk?
Upvote
0
this is a good example of not thinking things through. how would the game determine if he made good or bad strategic decisions?
Upvote
0
i've never played a RO, but i'm under the impression that tanks are most important; as such i would like to see stationary AT-guns that can be used by infantry. as i assume that the best weapon against an AT-gun would be infantry, this would make infantry more important in the combined warfare maps.
if my assumption of "tank trumps all" is incorrect, i would gladly be proven wrong
if my assumption of "tank trumps all" is incorrect, i would gladly be proven wrong
Upvote
0
One of my favourite BF1942 mods was based on WWI, and it had movable artillery pieces. I had a ball using them, and I would again, if they were in a game like RO2.
Upvote
0
I'm pretty much the opposite - I think any fixed gun emplacements, (MG, artillery, whatever) are a complete waste of time in an FPS. Sure they can be fun at first, but once everyone knows where they spawn, they become essentially nothing but eye candy. If it's in a position where it can dominate the field, then it will be targeted by everyone with a gun, if you aren't totally exposed to snipers, then you probably cant hit anyone either.
As far as I am concerned, if it can't be moved, then it can't be used, and if it can't be used, why bother putting it in? In BFBC2, I can count on one hand the number of times I've used a fixed emplacement, and the total is equal to the number of times I have been killed in a fixed emplacement, and also the maximum number of minutes I survived in said emplacement.
The thing is, map designers never want to give the fixed position a clear field of view (in BF2, they often put AA missile launchers in low lying areas surrounded by trees and buildings!) for fear of "unbalancing" the map. The problem is, the fact the weapon can't move already makes it unbalanced as does the fact everyone knows where it is.
So you can't see anyone to hit, but they already know you're there, and being stuck in the fixed emplacement only makes you an easy target to flank and kill.
Let me put it this way: You're attacking a target you know has a fixed gun emplacement. Do you go ahead and attack the target, hoping the gun is not manned, or do you just drop some arty on it, or throw some nades that way... just in case? What about everyone else on your team? That is what usually happens with fixed emplacements. In BF2, the IGLA emplacements were bombed mercilessly, regardless of whether or not anyone was actually stupid enough to try and fire them, making them utterly useless.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Name maps where defenders actually are able to get to their first line before attackers are there.. I think I can count them on one hand. >_>
Upvote
0
does this count the obviously warm-up points like in raids where they were less than 50m from british spawn, out in the middle of a really open field?
also - emplacements in bfbc2 weren't too bad, but was mostly when they were eg (quick use on) the conquest maps or the ones in the night map, where their main job was cutting down every last tree on the map while the attackers cleaned up their new spawn, and making it impossible for the defenders to get anywhere without being shot to ****
Upvote
0