Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

BF2 Arty Scan UAV etc

Tags:
  • Games
  • Video Games
Last response: in Video Games
Share
August 24, 2005 9:26:51 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

Yo DICE

Commander elections and the glory of doing it, they can keep it,
if I want to point and click and see dots move about on a screen,
theres plenty of real time strategy games out there that do it much better.
Panzer General 2 etc.
BF2 with the Comander toys, Arty Scan and UAV yuck.
they might work on a big complex map with 50 flags, and a 4 hour play time.

The scan is too all seeing, much better if it just showed threat
warnings compiled from teams warnings, and Commander added icons and
requests.

Like wise the UAV should have to fly to its target, circle and beam back
shakey B&W video to the commander, maybe with a remote controled camera
onboard, this would give the Commander something proper to do with a
skill component and a big reward for good ones.

Of course then the C would not be able to play as such, but would have
to sit in the UAV shack or man the arty guns ala BF1942, and maybe run
between them, or another person mans and aims the arty (BF1942 style)
and fires when given permission by Commander.
SpecOps and or Snipers could have binocs and Sat relays to send back
targets too.

DICE could implement this easily, and I think most people who like doing
the Commander bit would like it too.

With a bit of luck we might see this in a future patch or a mod.

DICE please remember the Battlefield series is a FPS game with vehicles,
not a C&C clone.

Little red dots visible through buildings and floors is a bit of a joke.

regards [AGB] malcolm
www.agbgaming.com

More about : bf2 arty scan uav

Anonymous
August 24, 2005 4:02:50 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

malcolm <m.tamblynREMOVE@mchsi.com> wrote in
news:vyTOe.273896$x96.89600@attbi_s72:

> Commander elections and the glory of doing it, they can keep it,
> if I want to point and click and see dots move about on a screen,
> theres plenty of real time strategy games out there that do it much
> better.

Anybody remember Tribes 2? Everybody has access to the command screen, and
it's as complete as your sensor net can make it. Can't see something? Go
deploy a sensor to cover that area, or dispatch a soldier or fighter to
scout.
Anonymous
August 24, 2005 8:53:03 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

"Juergen Nieveler" <juergen.nieveler.nospam@arcor.de> wrote in message
news:Xns96BC6166A1635juergennieveler@nieveler.org...
> malcolm <m.tamblynREMOVE@mchsi.com> wrote:

> > Little red dots visible through buildings and floors is a bit of a
> > joke.
>
> It's an effective way of presenting intelligence information. People in
> the real military would give their right arm for that kind of system.
>
> Juergen Nieveler


Presenting this sort of information from a UAV or Satellite scan while the enemy is inside the building is a bit
unrealistic. And if the commander is going to be given information via satellite scan, why not include info on other
large biologicals that would be also giving off heat? i.e. false positives.

I'd like to see the increasing ability to disrupt the commander's communications with his assets the further away the
commander is from his assets. I 'd also like to see the ability of assets be moved around the map.

Gorque
Related resources
Anonymous
August 24, 2005 11:19:38 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

"zul" <zul@<remove>hotmail.com> wrote:

> Presenting this sort of information from a UAV or Satellite scan while
> the enemy is inside the building is a bit unrealistic. And if the
> commander is going to be given information via satellite scan, why not
> include info on other large biologicals that would be also giving off
> heat? i.e. false positives.

There aren't any animals in the game :-)

Seriously, it's a feature that both sides have, and that can actually
be a hindrance if the commander reports every single red dot.

> I'd like to see the increasing ability to disrupt the commander's
> communications with his assets the further away the commander is from
> his assets. I 'd also like to see the ability of assets be moved
> around the map.

We'll see a lot more SpecOps going after the command assets once EA
decides to give points for blowing stuff up...

Juergen Nieveler
--
Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 12:05:03 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

"Juergen Nieveler" <juergen.nieveler.nospam@arcor.de> wrote in message
news:Xns96BCD831ED39Djuergennieveler@nieveler.org...
> "zul" <zul@<remove>hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Presenting this sort of information from a UAV or Satellite scan while
> > the enemy is inside the building is a bit unrealistic. And if the
> > commander is going to be given information via satellite scan, why not
> > include info on other large biologicals that would be also giving off
> > heat? i.e. false positives.
>
> There aren't any animals in the game :-)

I know that.. :-)

But it would add a bit of realism if false positives were randomly added for either civilians and/or animals and it
would slow down certain trigger-happy commanders from artying an area w/o confirmation of hostile forces.
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 12:31:13 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

"zul" <zul@<remove>hotmail.com> wrote:

>> There aren't any animals in the game :-)
>
> I know that.. :-)

Damn, I just noticed that I was wrong - I could swear I saw birds
lifting off at one time in the game...

> But it would add a bit of realism if false positives were randomly
> added for either civilians and/or animals and it
> would slow down certain trigger-happy commanders from artying an area
> w/o confirmation of hostile forces.

But it's pretty rare that Squadleaders call for artillery - so what's
the commander supposed to do, wait for hours until somebody realises
that there might be a good target for artillery?

Besides, if you add civilians, you'd have to add penalties for shooting
them, too - civilians run as bots that autopunish? ;-)

Juergen Nieveler
--
Superoxymoron: Government worker
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 3:47:31 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

"Juergen Nieveler" <juergen.nieveler.nospam@arcor.de> wrote in message
news:Xns96BD5E21EF3DCjuergennieveler@nieveler.org...
> "zul" <zul@<remove>hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> There aren't any animals in the game :-)
> >
> > I know that.. :-)
>
> Damn, I just noticed that I was wrong - I could swear I saw birds
> lifting off at one time in the game...

:-) True, but they're not large biologicals. More like future featherbed stuffings.


> > But it would add a bit of realism if false positives were randomly
> > added for either civilians and/or animals and it
> > would slow down certain trigger-happy commanders from artying an area
> > w/o confirmation of hostile forces.
>
> But it's pretty rare that Squadleaders call for artillery - so what's
> the commander supposed to do, wait for hours until somebody realises
> that there might be a good target for artillery?

I used to call for arty all the time in DC, either as a sniper or as a spec ops, and was quickly supported. I believe
that is the secondary role of these units and DICE, by leaving this function out of these kits, has severly limited
their usefulness.


> Besides, if you add civilians, you'd have to add penalties for shooting
> them, too - civilians run as bots that autopunish? ;-)

LOL! I wasn't thinking of penalties or autopunish, but more like wasting one's artillery on a non-hostile.

Gorque
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 3:48:21 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

"zul hotmail.com>" <zul@<remove> wrote in message
news:p B1Pe.1156$rS4.616@newssvr22.news.prodigy.net...
> I'd like to see the increasing ability to disrupt the commander's
communications with his assets the further away the
> commander is from his assets.

Hey, that's an original and "realistic" way to try to encourage commanders
to COMMAND rather than just grabbing the position so they can claim a few
extra points and be able to call Arty/UAVs when *they* want it.

Would be even better if everybody lost commander info (mini-map) when the
commander enters a vehicle (possibly allow passenger in APC or Transport).
That would encourage players to mutiny vote against these non-commanding
commanders.
August 25, 2005 3:48:22 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

"Kilgaard" <Kilgaard@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1124934503.3aa8c97ef9e3e0e46e52fd464c6385a1@teranews...
> "zul hotmail.com>" <zul@<remove> wrote in message
> news:p B1Pe.1156$rS4.616@newssvr22.news.prodigy.net...
>> I'd like to see the increasing ability to disrupt the commander's
> communications with his assets the further away the
>> commander is from his assets.
>
> Hey, that's an original and "realistic" way to try to encourage commanders
> to COMMAND rather than just grabbing the position so they can claim a few
> extra points and be able to call Arty/UAVs when *they* want it.
>
> Would be even better if everybody lost commander info (mini-map) when the
> commander enters a vehicle (possibly allow passenger in APC or Transport).

Boy, I *love* that idea... don't let the commander play with his toys if
he's off playing fly-boy in a jet or something.

And then there was the USMC commander the other night on Karland who took
the U.S. Tank, drove it to a southern corner of the map and just sat in it
commanding, denying his team the use of it.
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 3:48:23 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

Nonymous wrote:

> And then there was the USMC commander the other night on Karland who took
> the U.S. Tank, drove it to a southern corner of the map and just sat in it
> commanding, denying his team the use of it.

LOL - no High IQ award for him this month...

regards,

Achtung Ecco
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 5:14:30 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

"Kilgaard" <Kilgaard@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1124934503.3aa8c97ef9e3e0e46e52fd464c6385a1@teranews:

> Hey, that's an original and "realistic" way to try to encourage
> commanders to COMMAND rather than just grabbing the position so they
> can claim a few extra points and be able to call Arty/UAVs when *they*
> want it.
>
> Would be even better if everybody lost commander info (mini-map) when
> the commander enters a vehicle (possibly allow passenger in APC or
> Transport). That would encourage players to mutiny vote against these
> non-commanding commanders.

Excellent ideas!
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 6:42:30 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

zul <zul@ wrote:

>>But it's pretty rare that Squadleaders call for artillery - so what's
>>the commander supposed to do, wait for hours until somebody realises
>>that there might be a good target for artillery?
>
> I used to call for arty all the time in DC, either as a sniper or as a spec ops, and was quickly supported. I believe
> that is the secondary role of these units and DICE, by leaving this function out of these kits, has severly limited
> their usefulness.

When playing as squaddie or squadleader I always makes good use of the
possibility of calling for artillery (even in a tight spot it is easy to
do using the "T" key ;-)). I find it more usefull now in BF2 compared to
BF42, where only a few player were actually able to use the artillery in
any usefull manner. Additionally, I love the graphical effects, when a
artillery strike lands ;-)

regards,

Achtung Ecco
Related resources
!