U.S. Carrier needs rebuilt!

Suggestions from our community members for PR:BF2. Read the stickies before posting.
Rudd
Retired PR Developer
Posts: 21225
Joined: 2007-08-15 14:32

Re: U.S. Carrier needs rebuilt!

Post by Rudd »

Engineer wrote:which bursts an other idea... Why there isn't a "Models requested by Dev's" thread in Community Modding section? :)

At least I couldnt find one... People who are interested in modelling could take a real project in their hands, instead of doing models that will never be used.

Just a slight off-topic idea. Kinda related though, you know... add the exact carrier you want to be made top of that list :P
thats actually a pretty neat idea.
Image
motherdear
Retired PR Developer
Posts: 2637
Joined: 2007-03-20 14:09

Re: U.S. Carrier needs rebuilt!

Post by motherdear »

Engineer wrote:which bursts an other idea... Why there isn't a "Models requested by Dev's" thread in Community Modding section? :)

At least I couldnt find one... People who are interested in modelling could take a real project in their hands, instead of doing models that will never be used.
it's because the devs got timelines to work with and got a limited amount of texturers and uv people (a surprising amount of modelers don't know how to uv)
on top of this they need to keep a consistent standard which means that they can't comment on everysingle version that would be created by the community (imagine several people doing the same model)

on top of that they want some stuff to be secretive so that they can work with it without interference


hence why we got the R-CONS which are all old community modelers that got promoted to that status because of a show of a good skill level and the ability to be able to work in a team.
Image

[R-DEV]OkitaMakoto: "Talking squad level tactics in bed is actually a little known aphrodisiac"
[R-CON]Pantera : "maybe you might learn that we are not super intelligent beings chained in UKF's basement being forced to work on this".
Punkbuster
Posts: 879
Joined: 2008-10-24 23:12

Re: U.S. Carrier needs rebuilt!

Post by Punkbuster »

Dev1200 wrote:Not all carriers look like that.


Also, the Essex is a great carrier for PR, since there aren't any maps (YET!) that feature jets and carriers.

A bigger carrier would probably be needed for jets anyway.. I don't know about you but i'd rather not have a bigger carrier then the Essex. Then you don't have to run 3 football fields to get around ._.
lol
Actually this carrier can be enough for jets, but if we got someone that is ready to code for a year, it would be possible to have jets on that.
If anyone got Flight Simulator X with the Acceleration Expansion pack, he will know what I am talking about :D
the F-18 can take off from the essex carrier but it needs some special things on that carrier and it can land there too.

here is a video of FSX carrier landing:
YouTube - FSX - Carrier Landing and Takeoff
Here is a video of real life F/A 18 landing on a carrier:
YouTube - FA-18 Hornet Pilot's View - Carrier Landing
and here is one taking off:
YouTube - FA-18 carrier take-off
In-game name: =[BF]= Rudy_PR
Arnoldio
Posts: 4210
Joined: 2008-07-22 15:04

Re: U.S. Carrier needs rebuilt!

Post by Arnoldio »

master of the templars wrote:i laughed so much


Image
Image

isnt this a REAL carrier/ship, looks pretty real to me
Ha, U got owneT. The desired carrier is too big, thats 2 badass for PR and 1, 2 planes on there would look plain stupid.
Image


Orgies beat masturbation hands down. - Staker
Dosedmonkey
Posts: 138
Joined: 2007-08-09 02:01

Re: U.S. Carrier needs rebuilt!

Post by Dosedmonkey »

Haha, that is pretty funny.
Image
Image
Image
Peeta
Posts: 1204
Joined: 2008-11-28 02:05

Re: U.S. Carrier needs rebuilt!

Post by Peeta »

I agree it need rebuilt but I doubt it will happen. I have Gmax if someone could show me how to use it. :D
Panem Today,
Panem Tomorrow,
Panem Forever.
FuzzySquirrel
Posts: 1410
Joined: 2008-06-18 06:13

Re: U.S. Carrier needs rebuilt!

Post by FuzzySquirrel »

rudy_eila wrote:lol
Actually this carrier can be enough for jets, but if we got someone that is ready to code for a year, it would be possible to have jets on that.
If anyone got Flight Simulator X with the Acceleration Expansion pack, he will know what I am talking about :D
the F-18 can take off from the essex carrier but it needs some special things on that carrier and it can land there too.

here is a video of FSX carrier landing:
YouTube - FSX - Carrier Landing and Takeoff
Here is a video of real life F/A 18 landing on a carrier:
YouTube - FA-18 Hornet Pilot's View - Carrier Landing
and here is one taking off:
YouTube - FA-18 carrier take-off
That's a nimitz class carrier...not the essex
Image
ExoDuUs
Posts: 69
Joined: 2008-08-05 09:19

Re: U.S. Carrier needs rebuilt!

Post by ExoDuUs »

Not all carriers look like that.


Also, the Essex is a great carrier for PR, since there aren't any maps (YET!) that feature jets and carriers.

A bigger carrier would probably be needed for jets anyway.. I don't know about you but i'd rather not have a bigger carrier then the Essex. Then you don't have to run 3 football fields to get around ._.
Just FYI does anyone remember the carrier from BF2 Special Forces??

the model and size would help a bit regarding a possible future JET Carrier.


Image
Image
Maxfragg
Posts: 2122
Joined: 2007-01-02 22:10

Re: U.S. Carrier needs rebuilt!

Post by Maxfragg »

NO NO NO
the iron gator is exactly the same ship, just with a higher LOD and some more rooms inside, but its NOT bigger at all
ExoDuUs
Posts: 69
Joined: 2008-08-05 09:19

Re: U.S. Carrier needs rebuilt!

Post by ExoDuUs »

well just a thought..

The main concern would be landing the jets. with enough scope to allow the 'imperfect landing' you dont want them crashed every time the need to rearm. On a public server you can never regulate who flys always. So a medium difficulty landing should be prepared if you were to make a Jet carrier.


Image
Image
Rhino
Retired PR Developer
Posts: 47909
Joined: 2005-12-13 20:00

Re: U.S. Carrier needs rebuilt!

Post by Rhino »

ExoDuUs wrote:well just a thought..

The main concern would be landing the jets. with enough scope to allow the 'imperfect landing' you dont want them crashed every time the need to rearm. On a public server you can never regulate who flys always. So a medium difficulty landing should be prepared if you were to make a Jet carrier.
There is a reason why they operate STOVL (Short Take Off & Vertical Landing) jets on it so they dont have a "crash every time they need to rearm" :roll:
Image
CodeRedFox
Retired PR Developer
Posts: 5919
Joined: 2005-11-08 00:47

Re: U.S. Carrier needs rebuilt!

Post by CodeRedFox »

Having carriers are cool but when 0% of the fighting goes on there and its only used by 1-2 players as a landing area the importance factors kinda low. PR maps are really too small for real fighter jets. A basic ship like the BF2 carrier works fine for now.

But in all means jump into max and bust one out ;-)
Image
"apcs, like dogs can't look up" - Dr2B Rudd
rampo
Posts: 2914
Joined: 2009-02-10 12:48

Re: U.S. Carrier needs rebuilt!

Post by rampo »

Image
Rhino
Retired PR Developer
Posts: 47909
Joined: 2005-12-13 20:00

Re: U.S. Carrier needs rebuilt!

Post by Rhino »

rampo93(FIN) wrote:Have a look...MaritimeQuest -HMS Invincible R-05 Page 1
Yes as stated in this topic before, PR is aware of the Invincible class aircraft carrier..... :roll:
Image
Skodz
Posts: 791
Joined: 2007-05-26 06:31

Re: U.S. Carrier needs rebuilt!

Post by Skodz »

Wouldn't the Battlefield 2: Special Forces expansion aircraft carrier from one of the map be an easy replacement for the vBF2 one ? We can enter it and it look more "alive".
Maxfragg
Posts: 2122
Joined: 2007-01-02 22:10

Re: U.S. Carrier needs rebuilt!

Post by Maxfragg »

and it causes lag, seriously, placing it on a not just water filled map is not the smartes idea, and as Rhino said before, captureing a enemy carrier is not very realistic, so it would not add anything gameplay wise
UncleRob199
Posts: 71
Joined: 2007-07-21 15:49

Re: U.S. Carrier needs rebuilt!

Post by UncleRob199 »

Edit the Special Forces one to not contain all the complex interiors? that's probably what causes lag or people computers to slow down. I think it would look much better, and shouldn't take nearly as long as creating a new ship. Maybe just put it in some maps and keep the old one for others, so we get variety. If there's a problem with landing jets, the strip on it could maybe be lengthened, not sure how though.

Anyway even doing all this editing should be easier than creating a new one, and if I remember right the SF ship looks almost exactly like the one that master of the templars posted on the first page of this forum.
DankE_SPB
Retired PR Developer
Posts: 3678
Joined: 2008-09-30 22:29

Re: U.S. Carrier needs rebuilt!

Post by DankE_SPB »

you're not allowed to edit original DICE models
Image
[R-DEV]Z-trooper: you damn russian bear spy ;P - WWJND?
UncleRob199
Posts: 71
Joined: 2007-07-21 15:49

Re: U.S. Carrier needs rebuilt!

Post by UncleRob199 »

DankE_SPB wrote:you're not allowed to edit original DICE models
Ah flump!
CAS_117
Posts: 1600
Joined: 2007-03-26 18:01

Re: U.S. Carrier needs rebuilt!

Post by CAS_117 »

k done.

Post Reply

Return to “PR:BF2 Suggestions”