Flying vehicles in ALL maps. [message #83991] |
Wed, 28 April 2004 09:53 |
KIRBY098
Messages: 1546 Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
Why not fellas?
Especially if you are going to institute the Recon bikes, and tracking antiair defenses.
Deleted
|
|
|
|
|
|
Flying vehicles in ALL maps. [message #84002] |
Wed, 28 April 2004 10:54 |
KIRBY098
Messages: 1546 Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
The only reason I could see Hourglass being an exception is because the highest land point is almost at the roof of the map. Even then, I would say do it.
Deleted
|
|
|
Flying vehicles in ALL maps. [message #84004] |
Wed, 28 April 2004 11:06 |
|
Aircraftkiller
Messages: 8213 Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars) |
|
|
They all need "ramps" or they need transitions removed at the top of structures so you can't get out over them.
Furthermore, they'd have to get visibility solve ran over them, and some just aren't made for aircraft to begin with.
Hourglass would suck for air combat, seeing as how the n00b cannon Havocs and Sakuras would "rule" everything from afar.
Volcano would do good, evidenced by Volcano Flying, but it's still not made with air combat in mind.
Complex might be good for it.
Field would not work right, it's terribly designed to begin with.
Under, possibly, but it's another rework of Field with a few additional features.
Canyon would never work right with aircraft, it's too cramped and goofy to use for them.
|
|
|
|
|
Flying vehicles in ALL maps. [message #84165] |
Thu, 29 April 2004 08:15 |
Slash0x
Messages: 455 Registered: January 2004 Location: California
Karma: 0
|
Commander |
|
|
Maps have to be designed for Flying in the first place. CityFlying is a good example because the wall barrier of that level is very high and very roomy. Walls Flying is the same way. Most of the other maps are too short and too curvy for flying.
L3T'5 4LL THR0W 3GG5 4T D4 N00B!
|
|
|
|
|
Flying vehicles in ALL maps. [message #84301] |
Thu, 29 April 2004 21:15 |
|
IRON FART
Messages: 1989 Registered: September 2003 Location: LOS ANGELES
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
Kirby098 |
No, they wouldn't.
|
Well if you didn't someone could easily Nuke/Ion any by placing a beacon ontop of a building.
I think Field, Under and Hourglass are terrible for flying vehicles. On all of them, the base defences won't allow any type of flying vehicle in. Also they seem too "cramped" to acommodate god-knows how many flying vehicles in. Try Under with a drop mod & you'll see.
Whats "imo?"
Quote: |
Quote from IRC
<[Digital]> get man_fucking_a_car.mpg
<[Digital]> ah fuck wrong window
|
|
|
|
|
Flying vehicles in ALL maps. [message #85684] |
Wed, 05 May 2004 17:05 |
|
Cpo64
Messages: 1246 Registered: February 2003 Location: Powell River, B.C. Canada
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
there is a script that could be used so you can't get out of a vehicle, if this is placed over top of a building, then you couldn't put a beacon there. Unless your tricky...
-->
|
|
|
|
|
Flying vehicles in ALL maps. [message #89197] |
Fri, 21 May 2004 11:38 |
Weirdo
Messages: 369 Registered: March 2003
Karma: 0
|
Commander |
|
|
You guys forgot Islands.
Altough I don't think Islands should be flying. The problem is the planes can use a very fast route on that map, and won't have any problems with AA unit's there. Of course you could set up an invicible wall (don't know the right name), but that would look extremly stupid in my eyes.
Size doesn't matter.
|
|
|
Flying vehicles in ALL maps. [message #90860] |
Sat, 29 May 2004 13:01 |
TonyMontana
Messages: 23 Registered: May 2004
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
Aircraftkiller | A lot of servers run it on a daily basis.
|
actualy very few server run this map becasue of lag and thebugs.
I run it on my server people seem to like, many are wow, new map. LOL... they never even played it before.
They should release some new maps for this game that everyone should download.
|
|
|
|
|
|