Planes in TW

[Aniallator]

At the moment, planes are an unknown in TW. Many people, I'm sure, hope to have player-controlled planes at some point; however, I don't think player-controlled planes are a good idea. I think AI-controlled planes are the way to go, and here's why...

1. Immersion. Flying a plane, you feel the limit of the map; it's easy to see where the map ends, and where the undetailed ground begins. Plus, you'll be doing loops most of the time; even in Arma 3, it seems like you're always doing loops. Now, if we have AI-controlled planes, there's none of that. I think AI-controlled planes boost immersion in that planes seem more real; they aren't limited to the map the way player-controlled planes are. How AI-controlled planes fly is programmed, so planes fly as per their type; Lancasters lumber along, while Typhoons are agile. There's more realism. Seeing a plane soar over, knowing it's not player-controlled and thus not limited by the map, is an immersive feeling.

2. Implementation. Planes are a b*tch to implement, but AI-controlled planes don't present as many hurdles.

3. Airstrikes. Airstrikes would be an asset that commanders can call in... however, you can't have airstrikes and player-controlled planes. It's really one or the other.

Now, I see planes implemented in two ways, as a commander asset and as an immersion asset. To see commander asset planes, you'd mark a target, then get on a radio to relay the target and request on airstrike on it. In a minute or two, one or more of some plane (usually Typhoons for the Brits, for example) ought to appear, bomb and/or strafe the target a few times, then fly away.

Immersion asset planes are something I really, really, really hope to see. All they are are one or more planes that spawn at random, and fly across the map. That's it. They can be a squadron of Typhoons, or a lone Mosquito, or whatever. Immersion asset planes simulate air traffic, and IMO give a huge immersion boost.

Plus, implementing them is pretty simple. Besides the propellers, they don't need any animations, and can use somewhat low-quality models (if you want) so long as they're flying high; and because they're flying straight across the map, there's no need for flight dynamics or anything, just speed differences between different planes.

That's my two cents

 

[drummer93]

I think that the only appropriate way to implement planes in TW is for airstrikes, in the same form that you call for artillery support. Maybe marking some static position, and the plane launching a couple of bombs or rockets. AI is very very difficult to implement, but maybe a simple animation of a plane overflying some position (I insist, static) in one direction and launching some bombs is easier

 

[Aniallator]

AI is very very difficult to implement

AI is difficult to implement when it needs to respond to players; for example, when you enter a dogfight with an AI plane, the AI has to choose... will he bank left? Right? Dive? What I'm talking about is what you're talking about here:

but maybe a simple animation of a plane overflying some position (I insist, static) in one direction and launching some bombs is easier

Basically a big animation. So when you request an airstrike, the AI-controlled plane spawns at the edge of the map and flies a pre-programmed route, animation, whatever you want to call it to the target, bombs and/or strafes it a few times, then flies away. So there's not actually "artificial intelligence" per say; it's just as you put it, a kind of animation.

I agree, to have literal artificial intelligence would take ages to implement, and it's useless anyway, because there's no need for it.

 

[Mars]

Nothing in game dev is simple.

Battlefield 1943 had a mix of AI bombers and player-controlled fighter planes, worked well. You could even dynamically control where the bombs would drop from the Bombardier's(?) view, which was neat.

 

[Esu21]

I personaly prefer Ani's idea. At least for a first moment,because is easier to implement that BF1943 model and it could be done for Chapter 2 that way xD

Later you can add player-controlled planes. Also,if that idea is implemented, will players be able to shoot down planes with AA guns or will the AA fire be also controlled by AI outside the map,so its also decoration-like?

 

[Aniallator]

Nothing in game dev is simple.

Battlefield 1943 had a mix of AI bombers and player-controlled fighter planes, worked well. You could even dynamically control where the bombs would drop from the Bombardier's(?) view, which was neat.

Having AI- and player-controlled planes means you need proper artificial intelligence as opposed to one big animation type thing, so for ease of implementation, doing one or doing the other is way easier than doing both.

 

[drummer93]

[MENTION=2108]Aniallator[/MENTION]

then we agree

 

[Mars]

[video=youtu;7o7Os4lIFiA]http://youtu.be/7o7Os4lIFiA[/video]

 

[FlyingR]

I would love to see in later Chapters, hopefully Chapter 5 (circa 2043), players able to fly planes. Since flying is one of my favourite parts when playing games, I would love to see coooeration between the airforce and infantry.

In the meanwhile I accept any form of AI or animation for airstrikes where the commander or squas leader radios over for one.

 

[Aniallator]

[MENTION=1595]Mars[/MENTION] bombers were employed strategically, not tactically as in BF1943; they can, of course, have AI because they just fly in a straight line. But TW won't have bombers. You need proper AI for AI-controlled planes if you want to have these and player-controlled planes, because what happens when a player-controlled plane shoots at an AI-controlled one? The AI plane can't keep flying in a straight line.

 

[Aniallator]

When marking a target for your commander, how about you have to relay the mark on the radio for the commander and other SLs to see it? So, only you can see the mark unless it's relayed? Unlike RO2, where once you've marked a target, Tinker Bell informs the commander so he instantaneously knows about it.

Something RO2 messed up in voice acting is that when using a radio, they say the same coordinates every time; I've listened to enough of "Target left two hundred from point X-ray!" In TW, implement this so that when voice acting coordinates, there's voice acting for individual letters/numbers/words, so that when you hear voice acting relaying the coordinates, it's the actual coordinates that you marked. For example, let's say you're the commander; you get on a radio, and see that one of your SLs has marked a target. You request artillery on the target. The voice acting commences...

"Requesting artillery on coordinates one-seven-three, seven-nine-zero."

That's what you hear, when in truth, the voice acting is saying...

"Requesting artillery on coordinates"
"One"
"Seven"
"Three"
"Seven"
"Nine"
"Zero"

What letters/numbers/words are voice acted depends on the coordinates the mark is at. So not only are voice acting coordinates unique, they're realistic because they're the actual coordinates that were marked. For reference, Arma 3 has the same system when voice acting your current grid.

 

[Mars]

Do bombers undertake evasive manoeuvres from enemy fighters? They'd be more of a danger to themselves and their squadron than the fighters would be.

And I wouldn't say you're in the position to know whether the game will have certain features or not.

 

[Sydd]

Am I the only one whose caught on the line not knowing if ani has the right idea or a fully blown out player controlled planes is the way to go? I mean once player controlled aircraft is implemented, question is, is it possible for it to bomb friendlies? I think I like ani's idea but err i don't think bots are immersive, they ofc can get the job done, thats for sure.
you could maybe have certain gamemodes revolving around air raids, for example: players in the skies objective: defend your bomber formation/destroy the bomber formation. On the ground, destroy the anti air gun emplacements/protect the aa guns kinda thing, if a handful of bombers make it and are able to bomb the objective, the attacking team wins.
hmm... Okay so I think implementing both players and ai in aircraft would seem fun.

 

[drummer93]

[MENTION=2672]Sydd[/MENTION], I prefer don't do something than do it wrong, and the flight simulation is one of the most difficult things to program, even when you do it in a simple way. Really don't expect player controlled planes in TW

 

[Esu21]

I personaly prefer Ani's idea. At least for a first moment,because is easier to implement that BF1943 model and it could be done for Chapter 2 that way xD

Later you can add player-controlled planes. Also,if that idea is implemented, will players be able to shoot down planes with AA guns or will the AA fire be also controlled by AI outside the map,so its also decoration-like?

What about the AA guns? *asks Esu while standing at the corner alone*

 

[drummer93]

[MENTION=2473]Esu21[/MENTION] Maybe you can use it to shoot enemy air support, or to shoot enemy infantry

 

[th_battleaxe]

I don't really agree on bringing player-controlled planes into TW. It would be too much of a fuss to get it right, I believe.

Secondly, on your airstrikes idea: there was a similar thread about that some time ago, and I did a bit of research on the subject and found out that Close Air Support (basically what you're asking) was rarely done. Most air strikes done by Allied aircraft over Normandy were pre-planned interdiction raids. Squadrons would be sent up with the orders to shoot at everything that moved within a certain sector. And of course, there was the odd Rhubarb.

Ground-to-air communication was still quite difficult to perform during WWII without the right equipment. The Germans developed a dedicated wireless set, but you'd usually see it mounted inside a reconnaissance vehicle.

Nevertheless, there were ways of telling a plane where to drop its bombs. I've seen a documentary where a British veteran describes how they would fire a red smoke mortar bomb at the place they would like to see disappear in a puff of smoke.

 

[Sydd]

@Drummer
So according to your logic humans should cease to exist because they aren't perfect entities. Bugs shouldn't exist because they are "wrong" and break the game, which means that the game shouldn't exist at all because it has bugs. You see everything that's wrong with that mindset? Anyways, it is quite understandable that implementing aircraft into the game is no easy feat since you have to add a whole other dimension. Like I said, I don't mind if they aren't but knowing a community that revolves around realism there will be a massive number of players demanding or asking or spamming for planes, this will be even more so after the tanks debut on the battlefields.
So it would be my assumption that planes will be showing up sooner or later in this game, it is inevitable.

 

[drummer93]

[MENTION=1183]th_battleaxe[/MENTION] yes I agree a lot. But maybe if planes are added in the future (don't forget that Normandy probably won't be the only scenery), the best way to do it is air support.
And yes, player-controlled planes are not a good idea for a several reasons

 

[Esu21]

@Esu21 Maybe you can use it to shoot enemy air support, or to shoot enemy infantry

I would love to shoot infantry with AA bullets (of course xD),but my other question: will TW have simulated AA gun fire when planes are in the air planes,just like War Thunder?