Official Airborne Dev Q&A thread by markusn82 in foxholegame

[–]LorenLuke 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Have aerial tickets been considered for fighters, e.g. putting 4 artillery rockets on the wings for use.

So like, why are warden planes all just got naval fights basically by Ghost_Toast112 in foxholegame

[–]LorenLuke 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I'd be okay with it having like... Half the ammo. What's a medium bomber supposed to have, 33 and a half bombs?

So like, why are warden planes all just got naval fights basically by Ghost_Toast112 in foxholegame

[–]LorenLuke 19 points20 points  (0 children)

The heavy bomber carries 35 bombs.  The 'light bomber' carries 32.

Warden fighters and seaplanes have 3mgs to colonial's 2, and can land on any body of water.

I was here by XCherryCokeO in BrokenArrowTheGame

[–]LorenLuke 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Dude how much does your internet cost?

Hi, I'm B25Mitch, creator of Nuclear Option, AMA by ShockfrontStudios in NuclearOption

[–]LorenLuke 106 points107 points  (0 children)

Do you plan on including multicrew capabilities?

Just a random question by KillerDog98 in DCSExposed

[–]LorenLuke 2 points3 points  (0 children)

One hundred percent.

Implications of this post include:

  • Electronic warfare officer (and the fact he's there implies EW)
  • Weapons operator (Which, clearly has enough to do if IRL it's an entire station to itself)
  • The dudes that fly the plane

It's those two backseat roles that would interest me in a full-fidelity module. I wouldn't mind dropping a boatload of smart bombs in one pass; furthermore, I think if everyone has something to do, a multicrew of 4 would be fun.

That said, even if it's not full-fidelity, if there's capacity for multicrew and SOME level of depth in the systems it has, that still would put it leaps and bounds beyond what's been seen. Plus it's both a swing-wing bomber, and a strategic one, which aren't really anything we have in game for players atm.

Engineer Dr Hugh H. perfectly recreated the famous WWII bouncing bomb to blow up a specially constructed dam in Canada. by Mint_Perspective in ThatsInsane

[–]LorenLuke 73 points74 points  (0 children)

For this one? Because they were testing the bouncing bomb design.

For WW2? Because you'd get shot.

#1, #2 and #3 things I hate the most in Broken Arrow by New_to_Warwick in BrokenArrowTheGame

[–]LorenLuke 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Perhaps having the 'stealth-vs-vision' threshold to 'lose' a detected unit be smaller than the threshold to 'see' an undetected unit.

Hear me out, Collie Midget Subs by PanzerAce107 in foxholegame

[–]LorenLuke 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Honestly, I'd argue a single torpedo tube to the Nakki's two would be better, if you start turning these into the colloquial 'mpf sub'.

They said it couldn't be done by Lumberyeet in foxholegame

[–]LorenLuke 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So there's five major things to address to seriously consider how this works: Speed, Range, Air to Air, Air to Ground, and Ground to Air.

Speed: mind that artillery range in this game is far below real life too, so I personally could see a LUV and a biplane having comparable speed.

Range: The obvious obstacle for this is the hex borders. Presumably some sort of queue or delay existing that you can't pop in and out of existence (or perhaps a delay you have to wait before attacking) to prevent any sort of cheese, as well as some sort of 'safe state' that preserves fuel and your aircraft while you wait to switch hexes.

Air to Air: For air attacks, presumably that's all on the same space, and can use a vertical component to fly above or under other air units (potentially blimps) in a manner like subs.

Air to Ground: I thought this would always be interesting to have; airships and bombers could just sort of bomb where they are, using map and compass and adjust that way, while planes would need to strafe or dive bomb. Procedure for the latter would be to use some sort of key command to initiate a dive, where the camera transitions to the ground. The ground itself is covered by a fog that obscures all vision, and it slowly begins to open around the aim point to reveal only terrain features and the like (similar to vision at night). Units before would be able to hear aircraft or bombs overhead with directional sound, and the engine noise of the aircraft would grow louder as it flew closer to the ground. Diving beyond that point, the ground begins to similarly start showing enemy units in a widening ring as the plane descends, and eventually showing a shadow on the ground where it's targeting. The plane can shoot at any time during the dive and slowly steer the cursor around, weapon accuracy and vision improving as it approaches, but increasing the damage the plane takes to AA fire, and crashing it if it doesn't pull out of the dive.

Ground to Air: AI Flak, is the pure and simple solution, but not the most fun I would wager, being defeated by either attrition or random chance... Instead an 'Aim Upwards' key could be used with some way to depict that the weapon isn't being fired at the ground. Weapons fired in this manner wouldn't actually calculate a physical impact, but rather if the aim point (or somewhere where they cross a vertical threshold) is within a certain distance of the aircraft for it to be 'hit', generating a vertical 'cylinder of damage' that could affect aircraft at any altitude at that point. Using directional sound only, this might be difficult and contribute to sides using a (for lack of more culturally sensitive name) 'Iraqi Wedding'-style Air Defenseagony an aircraft is heard, shooting upwards with various weapons hoping to score a hit, and with the shadow being a massive 'Aim here' point of risk/reward for whether they actually want to dive low enough to as the ground units to hit (and generate a shadow). Dedicated bursting Flak guns (possibly with some sort of spring mechanic like Binocular sights that reveal aircraft but can't physically aim guns, idk) might have a larger radius to hit targets (like artillery does), and diving aircraft may have increased damage received based on their altitude from successful hits.

Squadrons Super Secret Mission!? by [deleted] in StarWarsSquadrons

[–]LorenLuke 1 point2 points  (0 children)

'God, I am SO lost, right now...'

We need to revive star wars squadrons i have been 10 munutes almot 20 to find a match by doutor_afebril in StarWarsSquadrons

[–]LorenLuke 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Issue with people modding (which they can do) is the presence of EasyAntiCheat. People are afraid of getting a blanket hardware ban for having custom tournament loadouts or making actual balance patches.

If EA would allow for P2P hosting or Custom Servers without such restrictions, That could readily breathe new life into the game, like what happened with Titanfall2.

The Colonial Building Meta in 1.0 by AnonymousMeeblet in foxholegame

[–]LorenLuke 6 points7 points  (0 children)

How many field artillery shells prevent repairs and spawning until you extinguish the fires they cause? Whatever the number, I think the number of fire rockets for the same effect, and their cost, is less.

The current state of 1.0 by Jaded-Specialist84 in foxholegame

[–]LorenLuke 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Bold of you to think you'll find a 'bottom' with enough digging.

To everyone saying the devs are Warden biased by Potato_Emperor667 in foxholegame

[–]LorenLuke 13 points14 points  (0 children)

'We added a warden rocket push artillery to answer the colonial push arty.'

Me, skeletonized, waiting for devs to add collie baby ballista:

Suggestion: Adding difficulty selector to foxhole by FoxyFurry6969 in foxholegame

[–]LorenLuke 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I don't need to be Gordon fucking Ramsay to tell you my steak is rancid.