Re: Possible ? If so what do you think of it ?
 

i could tell you guys - play coop at least once - bots are accurate, but are not invincible [i can say that bot with rifle is better than 90% humans]
play Battle of Britain COOP and tell me how hard is to kill a he111 fully manned [yes, bots use defensive guns very often] - it is as simple as it is when they are not present - why? because bombers die way to fast... and is very easy to simply snipe bomber from very long range [even with convergence spreading bullets a bit] while doing slight evasive maneuvers - for human gunners it is even harder because human pilots dont fly stright and gunner has not only to lead his target bu to lead his pilot [haaard thing]
only realy fresh pilots come close to bombers - because it is not needed, and CAN be realy dangerous

until bombers become stronger, gunners are almost useless

but, yes, i'd love to have at least few tank mgs manned by ai - coop ai isnt deadly accurate with this toy and rarely save my ass, but it is better to have one than not

Re: Possible ? If so what do you think of it ?
 

The bots do shoot straight, I'll give them that.

Re: Possible ? If so what do you think of it ?
 

OHHHHH i love that idea! itll make the bomber at least slightly less a coffin (maybe)

Also make the bots man all the turrets. so people wont have to, but give players the ability to take over when ever they need to

Re: Possible ? If so what do you think of it ?
 

from my experience bots seem to at least try deflection shooting - but i cant tell for sure - it'd be nice touch if it is possible - because gunners life was always short and borring [with intermediate excitement once a while] - as it was in reality...

Re: Possible ? If so what do you think of it ?
 

You are ignoring the fact that not all vehicles are alive at a given point in time. So my statement holds true. I never said that all tank MGs are always manned. In fact, i said that 70% of times there is a rear gunner in a plane, but tank's MGs are occupied less often, due to the fault of stupid tank commanders that don't let the MGers do thier job. Now if you want to calculate that, go ahead waste your time.

Bottom line is: contrary to your statements that:
Bombers do have gunners, and MGs in tanks are not almost always empty. The are empty only when stupid pilots take off without waiting for infantry to board their bomber, or when the selfish tank commander twists and turns his turret at every single infantry, not letting the MGer on top do his job.

Not taking purely tank maps into consideration (Valirisk, Prohorovka, Kasserine) there are much more infantry then available tank positions.

That's the thing, players don't have a set % aim. It varies based on skill (that's why it is an FPS that's based on individual player's skill, not some MMORPG, where the % varies on what you have, and not the individual player). There may be good players with higher %, there may be not so good players with lower %, there may be crap players with negative % :rolleyes: .

Same again, even a good player's % will differ on circumstances. It will go up in ideal situation (stationery, clear target), and it will go down when someone is firing at him, he is destracted by other explosions, he hesitates what target to choose, he is hindered by tank's movements, etc, etc, etc. A bot (automated gun) will always have the same %, it will not hesitate, it will fire just as accurately on the move while not moving, it will not get distructed, it will not make mistakes. It will be exactly that: a bot, a robot!

Reason why we play against humans is cause a human thinks on it's own, he makes choices, he uses cunningness, he makes mistakes. That's the challenge of playing against humans, you cannot be sure of what the human will do. With humans, you can play mind games: "i am going to move here... but he knows that i might move here.... so i will move here instead.... but he knows that i know that he knows that i might move here so he will be expecting me there, so i will move there instead.... but he knows that i know that he knows that i know..... on and on and on. You get the point. This will only happen with humans. That's the challenge of playing with humans. A bot will always be the same.

If i wanted to play against predictable bots set at skill level of 70%, i would have bought a singleplayer game and played it offline. I am playing online against humans, cause i want the challenge of playing against unpredictable humans.

And behold the new era of arcade, where a rambo tanker will drive into a flag, with AI blazing at all defenders from all MGs with a fixed accuracy, no matter what manuevers the tank makes. No need for teamwork, no need for teammates to support the tank or be his gunners. He is the rambo tanker with automated guns. :rolleyes: Wow, awsome teamwork in a team game :rolleyes:

And behold, here comes the rambo Battleship, all alone, yet he can withstand any attack of planes, cause he's got automated guns. Who needs a crew of teammates, when you alone can be unsinkable :rolleyes: Let's go, Rambo, let's go :rolleyes:

You are proposing that that in team game, we should screw teammates and go without them, since we got automated guns. BF/FH rewards teamwork: if you are alone in a battleship, you will die from a B17 bombing run. If you have a teammate on board, you will be rewarded, cause that teammate will take out the enemy bomber. Yet you are saying, screw teammates, i don't want teammates, i want to be alone and my guns working by itself. And don't tell me that people would want to have human gunners, prone to error, when they could have automated gunners instead.

Heh, i got an idea. Let make automated Flak/Pak guns, that will blow up your tank at the edge of the fog, through the bushes. Let make automated carpet bombing B17s, that will zero-in on your tank from the highest altitude and will bomb you with no error. Hell, lets make automated bazooka men, that will kill your tanks with precision, or automated minelaying APCs, that will mine every single road

You are asking to take out the teamwork element, and make every vehicle a 1-man-army, so that a lone user of that vehicle would get all the benefits which otherwise would have required cooperation between several players. As i said, buy a singleplayer game and play with bots offline.

Re: Possible ? If so what do you think of it ?
 

I swear sometimes that bots hack. I know it sounds stupid but they will kill you from 1000m with a rifle and they wont even be pointing it in your general direction.

Re: Possible ? If so what do you think of it ?
 

I have to agree that BoW has a good idea, but even one team mate in a bomber gunners position or on AA on a DD or BB makes a huge difference. I often tag along in a gunners position in a bomber just because most people dont expect the defensive positions to be maned.

Re: Possible ? If so what do you think of it ?
 

That is what AT infantry weapons are for.....kill tanks that attack flags and come into range of infantry enjoying solid cover like bunkers, trenches, manholes and sandbag walls....

The only diffrence automated tank MG gunners will make, is it will pay off for infantry to have solid cover untill the tanks gets near enough to take out....that is realism, not arcade....

AT infantry weapon = short range weapon to kill tanks that attack your position

Tank MG = offensive weapon to kill infantry that is not in bunkers, trenches and manholes where they are supposed to be. ( when enemy tanks attack )

Not unsinakble.....but a realistic challenge to sink, like in a real war.

How can anyone enjoy destroying something, that doesn't fight back ?? That is cheap, dishonerable, skilless, no challenge at all. A warship is supposed to spit hell at you, not lay there doing nothing.....a bomber is not a defenseless target drone for your fighter......a tank not a target drone for your AT infantry weapon. You should be under fire when attacking these vehicles where the MG positions face you.....in a real war you would be under fire, then why not in FH ?

Yes, i agree humans should be in them.....that is why i suggested, they are automated when no human is in them, but are human when a human does occupy them. That is why i suggested they should be set to a level an average human would do better.....this encourages to have humans in those positions, but protects the vehicle player to a certain degree against cheap kills when there is no one that want to be gunner for you.....or in small servers there simply aren't enough players to be vehicle MG gunners. ( the average FH server is such a server )

By the way.....why do you get so pissed off about a subject, that is purely hypothetical ??

Re: Possible ? If so what do you think of it ?
 

don't get me started

He is right about the greatly increased chance of Rambo-ism, though. Although, whether thats a bad thing is not for certain. AI-assisted tanks and bombers would be properly fearsome to infantry and fighters, the way they should be. Whether teamplay would be adversly affected is up to the players themselves, as it always has been.

Re: Possible ? If so what do you think of it ?
 

They do that in Ace's High -- when you man a machine gun all the other machine guns will track the same target and if they have a line of sight, they will fire (Ace's High also has two drone bombers mimicking your moves, so their guns track the same target and the ones' that have line of sight will fire -- is way cool -- forms quite the cone of death.)

I'm not too psyched about AI machine gunners for vechicles.