A Republic Gunship we can all live with!

[CorranSec]

Sith- what if I don't want to use my land army? You shouldn't have to use your land army! That's what I'm saying! If a couple of my frigates were cruising around on the opposite side of the map to my base and were suddenly attacked by something AA, I really don't want to have to bring my land army in! And what if I'm a civ which focusses on air?

The way it really should work is that the best counter for air is air. But if you can't manage that (the player, not the game), fair air/ground battles should be possible.

 

Worf- I would have paid attention to what you said, except that you mentioned you'd been playing Dungeon Siege. I would rather the aforementioned 'repeated hitting with blunt object' to any further mention of that game. Thankyou.

Oh, and while you're hitting me, hit that stupid narrator fella from Dungeon Siege as well. He deserves it. And he also deserves to burn, rot, bleed, be drowned, and suffer bad bowel movements, but not actual death. That would be putting him out of his agony.

 

Windu-

The gunship looks like it would be good anti-air, and would be fun to use in anti-air situations. But, if you'd rather it shoot ground targets, it would also fit as the Assault Transport, which can kill unprotected troopers.

The way I saw it, it was used as a suprise weapon, which dropped troops and then provided air support as well as extra transport. Wow- just like the Assault Transport!

Rockets might be cool to look at, especially if the fighters moved when attacking, but it might damage gameplay to have a far-off attack from the bomber. The actual term "bomber" implies dropping bombs, and though that has no effect on modern-day bombers, I think it works better in gameplay. Maybe a different unit could fire rockets (Assault Transport comes to mind......)

If you're referring to the Bomber Transport, I already pointed out how it decreases realism and gameplay.

You never know about these blunt-object-using people..... they have a tendency to find whoever they're looking for, and then..... er...... utilize their blunt object. Rather scary.

[jedi3112]

I would love to see air dogfights, an X-wing (jet) isn't designed to be hovering above ground, doesn't look like it's using it's strong points (speed) either. An Assault Transport (helicopter) hovering above the ground, first of all it's designed for it, second it would use it's strenght in accuracy. Remember EE fighters weren't really good against ground, but quite good vs air, bomber were, but they only had 1 run, not very good vs air, helicopters were too but only against specific units, also not very good vs air, gunship was good vs infantry, the other was good vs armored units (tanks, SWGB would be mechs).

[lukeiamyourdad]

Exactly!

Fighters are supposed to be good vs air first.

[Sithmaster_821]

Corran-The problem with being able to make an air only army is the same as the problem of being able to make a trooper only army, or a mech only army. The idea in RTS's is to diversify, and being able to make single unit/class armies is a major no no.

The Gunship is not good anti-air, it didnt shoot down a single object.

If we didnt see x-wings didnt shoot down any air units, would they no longer be considered aa?

How do you know it's good at raiding? It was used as an assault transport helicopter gunship in a large ground battle.

Not a single fighter was seen "raiding" in any Star Wars movie. Its abilities are implied.

The Gunship also uses rockets, and is very good vs mechs, as we see in Episode 2.

In Ep 2 i saw it slice a crapload of troopers into tiny pieces and and blow up a combustable building. Im not seeing your point.

You dont have the ability to hit me with a blunt object.

You'd be suprised about what i can do

 

Jedi, the only problem with that is this is Star Wars and SWGB, not history and EE

[Darth Windu]

corran - the modern B-52 'Bomber' can carry weapons that have a range of 3000km. The term 'Bomber' only refers to an aircraft, normally large, that has the primary role of striking ground targets. That's all.

[CorranSec]

Windu- I must stress that we are discussing the fictional universe of Star Wars, which has tactics and units that are absolutely different from any modern or historical tactics and units.

 

Sith- If the aim is to diversify, why are there only four types of air unit in the current GB? Why can an entirely ground army win?

Though I want diversity, I want battles between air and ground units as well. It's reasonable to think that they are each others' equals and can battle it out without having to call on reinforcements (air or ground respectively). For a compromise, though, it is also reasonable to believe that a mixed force is necessary to take a fortified enemy base.

 

Jedi- If we look at the movies, every air unit moved when attacking. The Gunships were always moving when they fired their weapons- not dogfighting, though, but moving forwards and firing downwards or forwards.

As such, I'd like every unit to have movement when they attack and are attacked, and if possible that movement accurate to what is known about the ship. Eg the gunship might do strafing runs like it did during the Battle of Geonosis, TIEs would be swift and agile in dogfighting.......

[jedi3112]

The gunship didn't move very fast neither was it very high above ground level, an AH-64D Longbow Apache also doesn't fly very high or fast, only 365 km/hour, 30 meters high (between the trees). An x-wing usually flies higher (deep space combat) and faster than a gunship , like an F-16 Fighting Falcon, wich flies around mach2 (2400km/hour) and high above the ground, several 1000 meters. So the x-wing is like an F-16 and the gunship is like an AH-64 (apart from the fact that 1 is an AT chopper and the other would be an AP chopper). The airspeeder would function like the A-10 in EE, an AT plane. I'd love to see dogfights too, so I think they should use the air system of EE, in wich we had dogfights, and work it out better than they did on EE, and remove the nuclear bomber. I think this would be 1 idea for an SWGB2, if worked out properly it would work very good.

[JediMasterEd]

So...much...arguing.Memories...of...Red Alert 2 forums...coming back...AHHHHHHHHHH! :eek: :eek: Eh, at least there isn't any swearing...I hope.

 

The Gunship should probably be a UU for the Republic. Maybe we should go back to what the origional post was...about the ever so "famous" Gunship. Personally I can care less whatever it is. As long as it's good, shoots and does it's job I'm happy with it.

[simwiz2]

Originally posted by Sithmaster_821

Hitting you repetitively with a blunt object would have the same effect, and it would be a tenfold more enjoyable.

 

:rofl:

[lukeiamyourdad]

jedi- I don't think the gunship looks like the Apache. The assault transport would look more like whatever those choppers were called that dropped US infantry during the Viet Nam War. In other words it won't shoot rockets...I don't want it to shoot rockets...

[simwiz2]

Originally posted by Darth Windu

The term 'Bomber' only refers to an aircraft, normally large, that has the primary role of striking ground targets.

The term 'Bomber' generally refers to an aircraft, normally large, that has the primary role of dropping explosive objects otherwise known as 'Bombs'.

[CorranSec]

I do not like this word "bomb." It is not a "bomb." It is a device which is exploding.

(sorry, I have this weird quote dictionary and I felt a need to use it. )

 

Can I please beg you all not to compare military units in our universe to those in the fictional Star Wars universe? They have no relevance to each other at all, and cannot be compared. The Republic is not the US..... Gunships are not helicopters.... Jedi are not the UN.... Jar Jar is not George Bush (apart from in the mind)... GB is not EE.... GB 2 will (I severely hope) not be Battlefield 1942..... and so on, and so forth.

They are not the same!

[jedi3112]

Originally posted by lukeiamyourdad

In other words it won't shoot rockets...I don't want it to shoot rockets...

 

That's why I said the Apache is an AT chopper and the gunship has to be an AP chopper, tanks are destroyed with rockets, troopers are killed with guns, so the Gunship will use guns.

[Sithmaster_821]

You all realize that the Star Wars universe is based soley on the imagination of George Lucas, not on history or what the US currently has in their armies.

 

If the aim is to diversify, why are there only four types of air unit in the current GB?

There are only 4 troopers, 3 mechs, 4 heavies, and 3 jedi, but you dont seem to think that there are too few of any of those units.

they are each others' equals

Calling air and ground equals is like calling calvary and non-mounted units equals, and that the calvary class should be as strong as all of the other non-mounted classes combined. The air is only a unit class, and is equals with the corresponding classes like troopers and mechs.

[CorranSec]

Sith- I don't think there's too few of those units because 4+4+3+3=.... uh.... *gets calculator, moans at lack of intelligence brought on by constant use of calculator, discovers calculator is broken...... goes out and buys new calculator, then discovers it is broken, then discovers that pushing the 'on' button helps.*

Oh. Yeah. 14.

I don't think there's too few of those units because they all add up to form ground. Ground and air should be the equal of each other, not troopers and air.

Air should NOT be a unit class. That's why I'm adding all these new units- because an air force should be just as large and diverse as a ground force, not just a single unit type like 'troopers'!

[Sithmaster_821]

Why not? Air seems to fit nicely as a unit class and, emps and rebs aside, LA has pretty much exhausted all of the aircraft units and there is an apparent lack of any niche on this side of balance that an air unit could play a part in without redundancy. Air didnt factor as much more than support in intra-atmostspherical (thats one hell of a long word) battles, which is what SWGB and any other rts will probably be using. In order for air to compete with ground, it has to be split up into classes whole bunches of units that would be essentially identical.

[Darth Windu]

Some of the comparisons here are quite accurate. The X-wing, N-1 etc are very much like the F-16, the Gunship is like the Mi-24, and the snowspeeder is like the A-10.

 

corran - with the bomber thing, what i was trying to point out is that just because it is called a bomber doesnt mean that it's only weapons are bombs. As i said, one of the B-52's primary weapons is a cruise missile with a range of 3000km!

[CorranSec]

Well, sure, air will be split up into separate classes (and probably have different buildings) eg. Fighter, Medium, and Capital ships, but the total number of air units possible must meet or be greater than the total number of ground units.

Is it STAR (space, flying things) wars or EARTH (ground, walky things) wars!?

Look at the movies. Read the books/comics/whatever.

It's clear that the main focus of the SW universe is the S- the stars, the ships, the space!

 

LA has nowhere near exhausted the possible air units. They only made the slightest foray into the world of air in GB, and will certainly have to expand in GB 2. Here's some of many possible units (copied from my list in the "ideas for GB 2" thread):

Cap ships-

Interceptor Cruiser (designed for killing fighters, there's a ship that i based this on but i forget its name.... Lancer frigate, maybe?)

Heavy Attack Ship (used for bombardment of ground, like an air cruiser)

Medium ships-

Freighter (this is built at the airbase but is basically a trading ship like the one from the spaceport, but with full flight capabilities, but still no lasers. Eg.... uh.... the freighters you see in the movies.)

Frigate (multi-purpose ship, can do some damage to ground (mostly troops), and take out other aircraft. Especially good at destroying other medium ships and interceptor cruisers. Eg. Millenium Falcon)

Fighters-

Assault fighter (an anti-cap-ship fighter, like the B-Wing)

Scout flier (a fast flier with slightly weaker lasers, good for raiding and scouting. eg. A-Wing)

[Sithmaster_821]

All of the units you suggested have equals on land that would be over shadowed by their air counterparts (why have two scouts or two traders?). This is ground combat we are talking about. Air plays a small role in ground combat, both from a gameplay standpoint and a realistic standpoint. Building air units should never be a must (unlike building land units which should be a must in LAND battle).

LA has nowhere near exhausted the possible air units

They hve already been forced to make up air units for every civ except the rebels, and the entire gungan and wokie air force are already made up.

It's clear that the main focus of the SW universe is the S- the stars, the ships, the space!

That would be all right and dandy if this was Windu's dream game (all realism). But its not. And unless LA's next RTS is a space RTS (which I doubt, seeing that SWGB was going to be their model for games to come), te star in Star Wars will be purely for looking at from your ATAT. Purely air combat has no place in a GROUND based RTS.

[CorranSec]

I meant possible classes of air units, not the artwork and names, which can easily be made up, as has been proven by the aforementioned Wook and Gungan aircraft.

Realistically, air is the focus of all major battles in the SW universe, and the deciding factor in practically any battle.

And to prove this- Think about one of the biggest land battles in the SW universe: The Battle of Hoth. Guess what prevented the Rebels from being totally crushed? Their snowspeeders- air units which played a crucial part in the ground battle!

Consider the Battle of Geonosis-would have been totally lost without the troops provided by the Gunships (AIR units), which continued to provide a healthy and crucial support role by destroying hundreds of enemy troops AND hunting down Dooku.

 

Why have two scouts, two traders, etc? Because they will be equal in having differing abilities which are both necessary. Also, there's the fact that all the ground units will be available earlier than their air counterparts, and will have upgrades once the airs DO become available.

Eg, in terms of scout- The ground scout will be able to be built early, and have a good speed and LoS, but low armour and damage. As upgrades become available, however, it gains far better speed and lasers, which makes it useful for raiding or knocking out enemy raiders/strike force.

The air scout will be available later but will have better speed and armour, but practically no lasers to speak of. It will also have a 'sweeper' technique to detect invisible enemies, instead of the scout's 'constant detection.'

 

Why does it have to be ground based? I know it's Galactic Battlegrounds, but it is always far better to have a balanced game-balanced between air and ground units, that is (sea doesn't rank quite as highly). Are you saying you'd actually prefer a game that favours ground units above a nicely air/ground balanced and far more fun and real game?

[jedi3112]

Originally posted by Sithmaster_821

Building air units should never be a must (unlike building land units which should be a must in LAND battle).

 

Why does it have to be a ground battle? That would make air useless. It has to be a combined air/ground battle. 1 should be able to rely entirely on air or entirely on ground. The rebel airforce is their main army, isn't it, same goes for naboo.

[simwiz2]

Originally posted by jedi3112

 

(1) Why does it have to be a ground battle? That would make air useless. (2) It has to be a combined air/ground battle. (3) 1 should be able to rely entirely on air or entirely on ground. (4) The rebel airforce is their main army, isn't it, same goes for naboo.

 

1 - Are you aware that the current game is based around ground battles? Is air useless now?

 

2 - It is a combined battle if one elects to build air units. That doesn't mean you should HAVE to build air units, or be able to beat AAM's with air units, etc.

 

3 - No, because air is not all that varied at the moment. That's like saying one should be able to rely entirely on Heavy Weapons.

 

4 - Gameplay > Realism

[CorranSec]

1) In the current GB, air has its uses, but air is in no way necessary to win, and it is nigh impossible to win with a solely airborne army against a player of equal skill. Ground rules the day.

2) How about, it is a combined battle if one ELECTS to build ground units? If they are made equal then they must be EQUAL. The best force is a diverse force, and the best battle is a diverse battle. Having equal amounts (in numbers and strength) of air and ground is the way to reach this diversity.

3) Have you missed the point, simwiz? All these ideas are based on the fact that there will be many more air units in GB2!

4) How does balance and equality (leading to good air/ground battles) detract from gameplay?

[Sithmaster_821]

1) Just the way it is supposed to be in GROUND battles. You didnt see people screaming for more ground units in rebellion/supremacy because it was a SPACE battle with AIR units.

2) Yes because they have a mixed force of jedi/troopers/mechs/heavies/ground uus

3) Fact? More like misconception.

4) How does making one unit class equally strong as the rest combined ADD to gameplay. And the Rebels and Naboo had primarily ground forces. The naboo's air force's only job was to escort the queen through space, not exactly the job of a huge standing air force that you think they had. And the rebels had pretty much the amount of air units you saw on the screen in RotJ. Their army (which consists of all non air vehicles and personel) was huge in comparison to that.

[simwiz2]

Originally posted by CorranSec

1) In the current GB, air has its uses, but air is in no way necessary to win, and it is nigh impossible to win with a solely airborne army against a player of equal skill. Ground rules the day.

2) How about, it is a combined battle if one ELECTS to build ground units? If they are made equal then they must be EQUAL. The best force is a diverse force, and the best battle is a diverse battle. Having equal amounts (in numbers and strength) of air and ground is the way to reach this diversity.

3) Have you missed the point, simwiz? All these ideas are based on the fact that there will be many more air units in GB2!

4) How does balance and equality (leading to good air/ground battles) detract from gameplay?

 

1 - Should heavy weapons be necessary to win? Mechs? Ships? Should completely winning with just ONE of those types of units be viable? That was the problem with AoC, one unit type could win consistantly. It is why AoC has almost as horrible balance as AoE and EE and why I never play that game anymore. Sith, can you give him a more detailed description of how AoC went wrong and why air units should not become the "Skirmishers on Arabia" of GB?

 

2 - Then they would lose horribly as they should. That would be like saying heavy weapons should be equal to all other unit classes combined. So people may ELECT to build non-heavy weapons, but they should be able to win with just heavy weapons? Since air is just another unit class if you are going to do one you may as well do the other.

 

3 - Such as more made-up air units? What would be the point of putting them in? With your idea air would most likely end up as rock-paper-scissor. We have fighters, which kill bombers, and bombers, which kill counter-fighters, and counter-fighters, which kill fighters. No thanks.

 

4 - Making one unit class so overpowered to be as important as all the other unit classes COMBINED upsets balance, and therefore gameplay. Air is already a good raiding unit in T3, and is quite formidable until homing sensors. Air cruisers make it a viable turtle-busting option in T4.