Dumb reasons for flaming ideas

[Krusty 0]

While looking over this forum, I've notice a lot of ideas get flamed because of two reasons: "It doesn't fit the timeline" and "Doesn't work well with the island setting" (ex: bombers and ships). I'd like to give some thoughts on these issues, and in general tell the people who get so worked up about this to chill out.

"Doesn't fit the timeline":

To put it simply: Who Cares? The new units/weapons won't be in the campaign, which is the only thing constrained by the 1985 timeperiod. I think it would be great to have weapons from different time periods so that missions authors can create settings from the present day, or farther back, such as vietnam.

"Doesn't work well with the island setting":

Again, it doesn't affect the gameplay in the campaign or current missions, so it's up to a mission author to make it work in a specific mission. It could be cool to have a mission where you get in a tough spot and call in a bombing run from a B-52 or something. Or maybe hunker down in a town as bomb rain down all around you...

Anyway, my point is that these additions would only add to the game, it couldn't hurt it. (I guess it could lead to some boring MP games, but the admin should have things set up so anyone can't call in an air strike at any time )

The bottom line is that almost no idea will really get done, 'cause BIS is busy doing important stuff, I'm just tired of seeing every idea get shot down, when it could be cool if used well in mission.

[jadacool 0]

Agree so much that i bump this thread!

And yes, some MP games would be pretty boring "Not carpet bombing from B-52 AGAIN?"

[Antichrist 0]

Doesn't fit the timeline:

WHO GIVES A d*amn?

[The Jub-Jub Bird 1]

I can see you arguement. But if the engine wouldn't be able to support an addon, then why try and pursuade BIS to spend lots of hours making a unit that nobody will be able to use? Because they won't do it.

[LoRdBuTtMoNkEy 0]

Ah at last people that feel the same way as i do exactly who cares about the timeline if u dont like a paticular weapon and it dont fit with the time line fu@kin dont use it just use ur brains once in a while u stupid sacks of cow sh@it plus im all up for all these diffrent mods suposedly to come out in the near future it can only increase the flexability of the game. thanks guys for bringin up this topic

[quickdraw_01 4]

'Bumpty Bump"

[Devil 0]

Krusty, I see what you are trying to say, but sometimes it can get out of hand. Do you personally like to look at stupid thread titles such as "MAKE A STAR WARS RACER POD!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111" or something like "I MADE A FLOATING TANK!!!!!"? No, we don't want to see those. This is a game of high intelligence, unlike Counter-Strike and all of those moronic games. I just try to keep the addons at some level of decency without it going to s**t.

But Krusty is right, y'all :cool:

[Stag 0]

You mean you don't want to shoot Anakim Skywalker?

[fixOPFsoundsplease 0]

How dare anyone presume to speak for everyone, who uses the game.

Some people would love a full Star Wars mod, that they _choose_ to install. Some would prefer a modern day mod, that they choose to install...its up to people to make and choose. Its not up to people to presume what _everyone_ thinks like a Political Commissar.

[JumpinJackFlash 0]

Krusty is a very wise man! Idea's should be proposed without little kids flaming them!

Best Regards

JumpinJackFlash-[21VB]

[jadacool 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from Devil on 9:20 am on Nov. 17, 2001

Krusty, I see what you are trying to say, but sometimes it can get out of hand. Do you personally like to look at stupid thread titles such as "MAKE A STAR WARS RACER POD!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111" or something like "I MADE A FLOATING TANK!!!!!"? <span id='postcolor'>

some X-wing or Tie-fighter squadrons should be able to make som #### on Everon

[Alaskan 0]

Does everyone like the Hummer i dont think it was in Service in 85 and everyone let it slip without a stink

so why get pissed at other people for asking for stuff that doesnt FIT in timeline lol think of the time line when you are cruzin the Malden streets in your Hummer

[Die Alive 0]

I'm still waiting for my Ewok Resistance fighters.  They'll make some crazy s**t contracptions to destroy a T-80 tank with logs or rocks.  Or they'll use a stone and a sling to take out a Machine Gunner from like 300m away.  Or how about the Ewok Air Force, a hang-glider that drops 5 pound rocks on tanks.

I want my Ewoks!

-=Die Alive=-

[Satchel 0]

Biggest problem is standartisation; means the more mods are available, the less MP games you are going to find for your specific (normal) setup.

For those that doesn´t like realism very much, all the units like F117, B52, F18, F16 and so on are normally fine, but for those seeing OFP more as a simulation on a halfway realistical basis, it´s nonsense, because it can´t be implemented anywhere near realistic specs.

First most of these planes operating at heights OFP can´t display, it´s a bit unrealistic to have an F117 cruise at 400m, same goes for all other planes.

Of course you can use the setviewdistance command, thing is only the highest end machines would then be able to run such an addon at decent speed.

At default you are prisoned in a 400m Bubble, you can´t see whats beyond that, pretty pointless for a plane as it´s usually flying much higher.

Next there are speed issues, with most planes you would fly over the islands in a couple of seconds and you have virtually no time to spot targets and fire on them. How should the takeoff and ingress procedure look? taking-off and flying constant circles, so that you don´t overshoot the island? If you do overshoot the island, you would probably having problems finding it again. This assumes of courses that setviewdistance is set to somewhere near 2000m, below that it would be an utter joke.

I assume it wouldn´t be even fun to have such things in there because of these aspects, that´s why i don´t think it´s a reasoned idea.

(Edited by Satchel at 8:50 pm on Nov. 17, 2001)