Possible ? If so what do you think of it ?

[[11PzG]matyast]

I would only fear the idea of AI gunners sniping you off beyond fog distances...

[Admiral Donutz]

Well if the AI would bot be made too smart (ea it wouldnt have some magical super skill which allowed it to NEVER miss a target making AA etc. into deadly superweapons) but just do atleast something it would be sweet. These bots should have a higher miss chanche then your avarage FH player so not to let people prefer bots above people.

Also tanks should have indepent MG positions so you no longerhave to shoot 300 bullets at a AT-er and still not hit him because the damned commander keeps turning around his turred and hull.

[Arisaka]

Originally Posted by Großadmiral Dönitz

Also tanks should have indepent MG positions so you no longerhave to shoot 300 bullets at a AT-er and still not hit him because the damned commander keeps turning around his turred and hull.

at least we got away, right?

the bots also have to take commands from the commander of the vehicle, so that if you try to sneak up on someone they won't reveal your position. also, the bots couldn't care less if one uses camouflage or hide - they will spot people and kill them through bushes. they will even shoot through friendlies to hit.

[Anlushac11]

What would be good for like a B-17 is if the planes MG fire didnt damage the plane but all the gun turrets that could were tied together like the battleships AA turrets so like if the tail gunner was tracking a target the top turret and ball turret and one of the waist guns would too.

You still need a gunner but he can control the guns on certain parts so it doesnt require more than a few players to control the plane and the turrets. Or have turrets linked to positions. Say bombadier in nose gets nose guns and top turret and rest are linked to the rear gunner.

[Blood n Guts]

That would be like the remote control system that was on the B-29s and late model B-26s. One gunner would control several gun ports by remote control and the guns would be set not to fire when they were aimed in a position that would damage their own plane.

[Beast of War]

Originally Posted by [SYN] hydraSlav

blablablablabla....


If you can't keep your gunners, then there is something you are doing wrong. If you don't meet enemy bombers with rear guns blazing back at you, you better find another server.


blablablabla.....

I was talking about there are not enough human players on most servers to fill the MG positions of all vehicles.

And without these positions occupied, those vehicles are cheap kills/ not realistic targets.

If you claim you are always in servers where all vehicles MG positions are taking, well....you ignore the fact that that is physically not possible. ( nicely said without calling you names eh ? )

A B17 bomber already almost takes up half the players on allied side of a 40 player server....add 3 tanks with 2 mg positions to that and 2 fighters, and you are down to 2 infantrymen, and nothing else....that is not what is happening in servers, mister [SYN] hydraSlav.....

I didn't say COOP game, because no-one want to fight skilless bots, and no-one likes bots in control of the vehicle itself. I am talking about automated defensive positions on vehicles, that have a set "somewhat less then human like" efficiency ( 70-60 % aim and not firing through the fog ) in firing on targets that threaten them.....if there is no human player that occupies that position.

Yes, arcade gameplay will be over then.....no more cheap kills of half occupied ( therefore half efficient ) vehicles. But there will be more realistic war, using your brains will be much more important. Also there wil be more action and the server will feel more "alive" when it is only a 24 or 32 player server....

When you see pictures or artist paintings of an air attack on a carrier or battleship, you see an inferno of AA fire.....When you join an average server however, most players will be at islands fighting as infantry, or in aircraft dueling each other. Some one that wants to attack a carrier, will be able to strafe/bomb it at will, with AA only coming alive if "plane campers" if present on the flight deck get irritated by that......

That is not war.......automated gunner positions will give FH more the feeling of a full out war.

[Coopa]

Would it be possible to have every member of a tank have a kill when any of the guns on the tank took a kill. Then people would be more inclined to get in a supporting position of a tank

[JAGUART]

AI/ NPC's would really add color to the game and make the scale seem even larger. FH should be played at 64+ player server capacity to take advantage of all the toys.

I always thought this would be a great idea esp if some custom animations were implemented for the AI

World War 2 Online has AI machine gun emplacements outside of towns to protect against attacks. They look like little LEGO guys.

[Frederf]

I'm for it if it's implimented well, I really shouldn't be able to sneak up behind a Chi-Ha or fly within range of a bomber knowning that that MG is most likely unoccupied (occupying them sure surprises people) because IRL all positions are manned at all times.

[lumpeh]

*Reaches for his SDK Marimbas*
Perhaps BF2 will have scriptablity for this, but for now it canna be done properly afaik.