Python controlled planes/AC-130 idea

[Aliblista]

Hi guys

This isnt a suggestion yet, more of a question.

I remember reading recently about a halo jump map in either poe or opk which included a python controlled cargo plane/spawn point which circled the map.

I'm wondering if such a method could be used to implement an AC-130 into pr i.e. static AC-130 very high up that circles the map (only 4km ones and above of course) crewed by the limited no. of people that can spawn up there and provides gunship support as its called in via the usual pr methods (lasing targets, marking with smoke etc)
Obviously this would require a great deal of coding work, as well as a model of the AC-130 with interiors etc

Its probably not very likely it will ever be in pr (as likely as legitimate halo jump orientated maps anyway), and it is slightly overkill but im just wondering.
Humor me

[McBumLuv]

This has actually been mentionned before as a way to get AC-130 area attacks in, and I'm failry sure it is possible, you just code the plane to enter from one end of the map, circle the point on the map with the strike called in and rip it up with a howitzer and 25 mm guns

The entire route would be static in the sense that it doesn't change one bit depending on where you call the strike, except it will have been cetered around that point of the map.

[lucky14]

Sounds cool. I'll give you that

[Rhino]

it kinda is and kinda isn't possible.

BUT, if PR was ever to have a paratrooper map in the future, this would be kinda how it would be done, but not a AC-130

[Scot]

Rhino i think he was referring to the fact of the HALO jump map as an example, he's wondering if you can have a static AC-130 providing player controlled fire support from a static AC-130 in the sky.

I think you could, but remember view distances and such mean it wouldn't even be that good.

[Rhino]

in some ways yes and in some ways no

it really depends how you would do it but the ways that would work for sure would suck

[ChiefRyza]

Is it possible to use a static model in the air for another type of area attack, say, you call down a AC-130 Strike, and the area is fired upon by chaingun fire, Howitzer shells and other ordinance? Of course the statics would be so high up they would be impossible to see by anyone, but would it be possible to link the area attack to multiple static models in the air, that fire in sync but with different firing rates.

At the moment the artillery/mortar/JDAM strikes work because a artillery piece spawns off-map to replace the charge-up time, but I do wonder sometimes if different artillery types on the same map are possible. Lets say you have the chaingun constantly firing, linked to one type of artillery piece and the Artillery and cannons linked to other artillery pieces. It should be possible to change their firing rates, as you guys have altered it for mortars and heavy artillery - the thing here again is, CAN multiple artillery munitions be placed on the same map? If not...there goes my idea

[Tonnie]

If this could happen then why are we sitting here doing nothing about it lol...
I made a C-130 back in the day i will see if i can dig up the model or not.

[AnRK]

It's alot to do with the realism factor though isn't it? There hasn't been a large scale para drop in a very long time by a conventional force or something like that has there? I'm sure there's plenty of situations that can be made up where it'd be plausible though

[AgentMongoose]

It's alot to do with the realism factor though isn't it? There hasn't been a large scale para drop in a very long time by a conventional force or something like that has there? I'm sure there's plenty of situations that can be made up where it'd be plausible though

that may be true- But PR numbers aren't exactly large Scale (32 v 32)... I for one would have blast on a reworked Barracuda map- where the US doesn't have the carrier, and instead is paradroped in. Also (just speculating) That would balance out the map some, making it a wee bit easier for the US forces to get on land and actually play.

[hiberNative]

i'd love to sit in a gunship high above the clouds and shoot laser targets even though i can't see the target. it's the same reason i like driving apcs and help my gunner find targets.

but i assume the cannons of the ac-130 would have to lock onto targets in order to be able to hit anything at all + avoid spam.

[Tim270]

To be honest, while it is kinda cool to have a c130 overhead, it is essentially taking away the CAS roles of the jets/helos and is only going to make playing infantry more aggravating as there is nothing you can do as a grunt on the ground to this lumbering beast in the air that is raining down hell on you.

[Snowno]

Tim is right, the enemy team wouldn't be able to shoot down the AC-130, making it balance breaking.

[Ace42]

It would be nice as an alternative to conventional artillery: Treat it like the JDAM, but instead of the plane just flying through and KABOOM, it circles the area the area-attack is requested on, and for it's duration it pounds the *LASER TARGET* made by the Sniper / SLer with cannon / chaingun fire.

And here's the interesting bit - so long as the target is within a set radius (the plane's circling area), the fire continues to be directed at wherever the Sniper / SLer who requested the strike puts his laser-target. So unlike a JDAM, which is just one "kaboom" and may have people running out of the area while the CO is OKing it or hiding in structures, etc - the SLer / Sniper can UPDATE the laser-position while the AC-130 is circling to mark up additional structures, units, etc to concentrate the chaingun (and maybe the cannon) fire-on.

If instituted in conjunction with the proposals for giving the CO a choice of arty to use, especially if instituted within the framework of a ticket-based economy, then it would be a very distinctive and unique tool available.

[Darkpowder]

Is it possible to use a static model in the air for another type of area attack, say, you call down a AC-130 Strike, and the area is fired upon by chaingun fire, Howitzer shells and other ordinance? Of course the statics would be so high up they would be impossible to see by anyone, but would it be possible to link the area attack to multiple static models in the air, that fire in sync but with different firing rates.

Unless we have a night map, it would be unrealistic to see these things deployed in a battlescape complete with lots of AAA and SAMs.

As there are very few of these aircraft in active service, a gunship like this is very much out of place on any daylight map.

If instituted in conjunction with the proposals for giving the CO a choice of arty to use, especially if instituted within the framework of a ticket-based economy, then it would be a very distinctive and unique tool available.

Snipers aren't well acquainted in PR with laser targeters, and the commander does have a choice of area effect weapon. The mapper decides which area attack is available in the mission to maintain balance / asymmetry as appropriate.

Because these gunships are not well suited to a balanced style of map, especially as in a conventional map air-power would be "unable" to neutralise the asset while we would see untouchable area attacks rain down with impunity.

[Saobh]

"Python controlled planes" ?

as in :





But on topic, maps "could" be done with this seriously unbalanced asset. But you'd need more of a system of linked underground bunkers on the defense side to be playable and interesting. The US controlling the Air and land an the insurgents the underground free to pop up here and there for blitz attacks.

It would certainly be a bit of a stretch of reality, as well even Tora Bora wasn't the big fortress it was fantasied to be.

[Ironfist7997]

Just to expand on AnRK's comment on paradrops, i believe that the last big-ish drop was during 2003 by the americans.

Having had a little search around, it was called Op Northern Delay and involved a night drop of a 1000+ paratroopers from the 173rd Airborne brigade onto an airfield in Bashur, iraq.

I guess nowadays its mainly heliborne forces that are used for strike missions rather than airborne drops altho i guess the option is still there for deepstrike if the need arose, but i guess it would need to be a pretty serious conflict.

[Ironfist7997]

sorry i went a bit off topic there.

I like the idea of having an AC-130 on call to drop some fire onto a stronghold but i gues it would be a bit overkill seeing as we already have arty( but that leads to another topic of commanders lol)

ahh well maybe one day when EA grace us with 128 players and 16x16 km maps.

[lucky14]

Maybe--Just maybe the AC-130 could be used in maps where it is offbalanced against the American's. For instance, you could have Kashan Desert, but the American's have only 1/2 the assets. Then it wouldn't be as un-balanced

[Anhkhoa]

Just to expand on AnRK's comment on paradrops, i believe that the last big-ish drop was during 2003 by the americans.

Having had a little search around, it was called Op Northern Delay and involved a night drop of a 1000+ paratroopers from the 173rd Airborne brigade onto an airfield in Bashur, iraq.

I guess nowadays its mainly heliborne forces that are used for strike missions rather than airborne drops altho i guess the option is still there for deepstrike if the need arose, but i guess it would need to be a pretty serious conflict.

Kashan is deep in Iran....
And its World War III....