Huxley Game, Massively Multiplayer Online First Person Shooter Game, MMOFPS

KingGryphon · 10-03-2006, 09:57 PM

Do you think aircraft should have limitations (like ammo), or should they be free ranging and have no restrictions.

Dragoon · 10-03-2006, 10:06 PM

everything needs its limitations in some sort of way or it will just be everyone getting that one item ftw.

Shinta · 10-03-2006, 11:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KingGryphon

Do you think aircraft should have limitations (like ammo), or should they be free ranging and have no restrictions.

Do the flight restrictions include maximum height levels, invisible walls and small sky boxes? or smaller things like ammunition, accesibilty, upgrades etc.?

Enemy21 · 11-03-2006, 12:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dragoon

everything needs its limitations in some sort of way or it will just be everyone getting that one item ftw.

yeah itd be kinda annoying if one plane came in and took out ur whole army

LimpJedi · 11-03-2006, 01:02 AM

Our rockets should be able to auto lock-on to aircrafts.

KingGryphon · 11-03-2006, 01:24 AM

I think that with planes, the battlefields would have to be huge for planes to cirle around and manuever in, which could cause lots of problems with conventional warfare.

Do the flight restrictions include maximum height levels, invisible walls and small sky boxes? or smaller things like ammunition, accesibilty, upgrades etc.?

I think that max height levels, invisible walls and small sky boxes is the biggest problems that I could see with aerial warfare. The smaller things like ammunition could easily be confined and fixed quite easily.

Alan8325 · 11-03-2006, 01:25 AM

Yes, balance is important but it shouldn't be cheaply done, like with invisible walls around capital cities and things like that which don't make sense. Anti-aircraft emplacements would work, but just like with any other item, an aircraft being piloted by a good player should be able to circumvent most defenses. Likewise with someone who is good with tanks, snipers, hoverbikes, or any other weapon.

Joneses · 11-03-2006, 01:45 AM

I agree there should be limitations like how much ammo they're packing but restrictions in the air is pretty poor since aircraft would probably need plenty of room for manuvering but I simply just don't like invisable walls.

Dementus · 11-03-2006, 09:03 AM

Well to the best of my knowledge Huxley will be all about urban combat which means little open space. This should allow infantry to avoid even being seen by an aircraft and severly limit its effectivness. The problem in planetside was that aircraft could essentially 'own' infantry as they had no where to hide or take cover, save for the occasional small forest.

Shinta · 11-03-2006, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dementus

Well to the best of my knowledge Huxley will be all about urban combat which means little open space. This should allow infantry to avoid even being seen by an aircraft and severly limit its effectivness. The problem in planetside was that aircraft could essentially 'own' infantry as they had no where to hide or take cover, save for the occasional small forest.

which is where the aa maxes came into play, where one could be on top of a roof or hill and 'own' aircraft without anyone to kill them

Lexion · 11-03-2006, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dementus

Well to the best of my knowledge Huxley will be all about urban combat which means little open space. This should allow infantry to avoid even being seen by an aircraft and severly limit its effectivness. The problem in planetside was that aircraft could essentially 'own' infantry as they had no where to hide or take cover, save for the occasional small forest.

Actually the U3E allows for large open areas, maybe not BF2 large but large nonetheless. Some screenies show open spaces as well.

Dementus · 11-03-2006, 11:41 AM

The point I'm trying to make is its likely that Huxley will be dominated by infantry, vehicles probably will only be situational.

Quote:

which is where the aa maxes came into play, where one could be on top of a roof or hill and 'own' aircraft without anyone to kill them

only to be sniped by a pheonix or taken out by a reaver from behind :D . Yeah I know PS was more a 'rock, paper, scissors' game, which took some fun out of it imo. I just hope huxley doesnt have a system where something is effortlessly able to destroy something else because its a paper to the rock.

Lexion · 11-03-2006, 11:46 AM

I agree with that, it was merely a side point.

Dementus · 11-03-2006, 12:23 PM

I know, and I didnt mean that Huxley would be all city fighting :lol: .

Shinta · 11-03-2006, 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dementus

Well to the best of my knowledge Huxley will be all about urban combat which means little open space. This should allow infantry to avoid even being seen by an aircraft and severly limit its effectivness. The problem in planetside was that aircraft could essentially 'own' infantry as they had no where to hide or take cover, save for the occasional small forest.

I don't know what they are going to do but I think aircraft 'in combat' would not be so good. I understand it in planetside because it is a massive open land combat type of game with the occasional tower and base fights. However since it is modern times in Huxley it would be nice to see perhaps a transport type of aircraft like the HART in ps.

Guyver · 11-03-2006, 04:26 PM

I wish people would stop devoloping super duper games and start developing VRMMO's. That would bring the land to "life".

Cyinn · 11-03-2006, 10:25 PM

They should be able to be shot down with a hand gun, as in real life, there are really so many intyricate parts in an aircraft that a hit any where could ruin its ability to fly.

OCmathew1000 · 11-03-2006, 10:34 PM

this is the future, i should hope their more stable than nowdays.
as a transportation specialist, i fly dropships, and maneuvering space is good to have, being able to fly up high then drop down when its time to unload is essential, and guns should be able to damage, but not much. and if their are heat seaking missles, make sure we have counter measures we can use, at least for the dropships. not unlimited, but enough not to get shot down constantly.

Shinta · 11-03-2006, 11:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyinn

They should be able to be shot down with a hand gun, as in real life, there are really so many intyricate parts in an aircraft that a hit any where could ruin its ability to fly.

rofl, who would even try to shoot down a full functional and very fast aircraft in real life with a hand gun in a battle situation? :shock:

Its tricky to hit aircraft in real life even with anti air weaponry

Bourne · 11-03-2006, 11:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shinta

rofl, who would even try to shoot down a full functional and very fast aircraft in real life with a hand gun in a battle situation? :shock:

Patton. :lol:

10-03-2006, 09:57 PM	#1 (permalink)
KingGryphon Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: New England Posts: 62	Aircraft Do you think aircraft should have limitations (like ammo), or should they be free ranging and have no restrictions. __________________ (\__/) (='.'=) (_) (_) (")_(") Virtute Et Armis

10-03-2006, 10:06 PM	#2 (permalink)
Dragoon Training Grounds Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 28	everything needs its limitations in some sort of way or it will just be everyone getting that one item ftw. __________________ \"Those who throw dirt, lose ground\"

11-03-2006, 01:24 AM	#6 (permalink)
KingGryphon Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: New England Posts: 62	I think that with planes, the battlefields would have to be huge for planes to cirle around and manuever in, which could cause lots of problems with conventional warfare. Do the flight restrictions include maximum height levels, invisible walls and small sky boxes? or smaller things like ammunition, accesibilty, upgrades etc.? I think that max height levels, invisible walls and small sky boxes is the biggest problems that I could see with aerial warfare. The smaller things like ammunition could easily be confined and fixed quite easily. __________________ (\__/) (='.'=) (_) (_) (")_(") Virtute Et Armis

11-03-2006, 11:46 AM	#13 (permalink)
Lexion Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 396	I agree with that, it was merely a side point. __________________ [img]http://www.geocities.com/gremlylizzon/ion.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.huxleyradio.com/radiosig.jpg[/img]

11-03-2006, 04:26 PM	#16 (permalink)
Guyver Super Moderator Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Destrehan, Louisiana Posts: 1,234	I wish people would stop devoloping super duper games and start developing VRMMO's. That would bring the land to "life". __________________ I'm here...NO.. I'm there.. NO.. I'm PSYCHOSIS

11-03-2006, 01:02 AM	#5 (permalink)
LimpJedi Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Victorville, CA Posts: 91	Our rockets should be able to auto lock-on to aircrafts.

11-03-2006, 01:25 AM	#7 (permalink)
Alan8325 Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 33	Yes, balance is important but it shouldn't be cheaply done, like with invisible walls around capital cities and things like that which don't make sense. Anti-aircraft emplacements would work, but just like with any other item, an aircraft being piloted by a good player should be able to circumvent most defenses. Likewise with someone who is good with tanks, snipers, hoverbikes, or any other weapon.

11-03-2006, 01:45 AM	#8 (permalink)
Joneses Training Grounds Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 6	I agree there should be limitations like how much ammo they're packing but restrictions in the air is pretty poor since aircraft would probably need plenty of room for manuvering but I simply just don't like invisable walls.

11-03-2006, 09:03 AM	#9 (permalink)
Dementus Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: UK Posts: 86	Well to the best of my knowledge Huxley will be all about urban combat which means little open space. This should allow infantry to avoid even being seen by an aircraft and severly limit its effectivness. The problem in planetside was that aircraft could essentially 'own' infantry as they had no where to hide or take cover, save for the occasional small forest.

11-03-2006, 12:23 PM	#14 (permalink)
Dementus Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: UK Posts: 86	I know, and I didnt mean that Huxley would be all city fighting :lol: .

11-03-2006, 10:25 PM	#17 (permalink)
Cyinn Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 131	They should be able to be shot down with a hand gun, as in real life, there are really so many intyricate parts in an aircraft that a hit any where could ruin its ability to fly.

11-03-2006, 10:34 PM	#18 (permalink)
OCmathew1000 Training Grounds Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 29	this is the future, i should hope their more stable than nowdays. as a transportation specialist, i fly dropships, and maneuvering space is good to have, being able to fly up high then drop down when its time to unload is essential, and guns should be able to damage, but not much. and if their are heat seaking missles, make sure we have counter measures we can use, at least for the dropships. not unlimited, but enough not to get shot down constantly. __________________ [URL=www.enclaveoilrig.com]\"In the world of online gaming, I am first and foremost a member of The Enclave.\"[/url] \"Carebears make excellent substitues for toilet paper, if you think charmin is soft, you\'ve never used carebears.\"

Sponsored Links