Would you like to see more detroyed buildings and such?

[Ironcomatose]

So the question is would you like to see more destroyed buildings and cars and that kind of stuff in the city maps. The way i see it is with all the fighting going on you would think there would be more buildings with fires and cars burning. Also more smoke from these fires and what not.

EDIT:Added a poll so the DEVs can get an idea of what the people want.

[Randleman5102]

I would love to see this, but i would lag like a crazy mother so i dont know how well it would handle out.

[$kelet0r]

I would love to see this, but i would lag like a crazy mother so i dont know how well it would handle out.

he meant pre destroyed as opposed to destroyable which would mean that a destroyed static is not going to be much more of burden than a detailed building static.

ontopic - well it depends how it's done tbh. At the map maker's discretion - imo in Basrah you would not see bombed out or destroyed buildings necessarily.

[Ironcomatose]

he meant pre destroyed as opposed to destroyable which would mean that a destroyed static is not going to be much more of burden than a detailed building static.

ontopic - well it depends how it's done tbh. At the map maker's discretion - imo in Basrah you would not see bombed out or destroyed buildings necessarily.

yeah today you would not but in this fictional battle we got A10 flying around!! I want some blown up shit!!

[mattcrwi]

I would love to see more destroyable walls in city maps... buildings I'm kind of iffy about... it might screw with game dynamics too much and there is also the issue of the variety of buildings if you use only the destructible ones.

[DirtyHarry88]

I AM TEH L337!!!11!!!!1 NO 1 CAN STOP ME!!

[Blackhawk 5]

Yeah im cool with that as long as it doesent lag. But on a map like Al Basra some buildings with arty shells or split in half like the palace is cool.

[Hides-His-Eyes]

I thought i was voting for more helmand buildings but either is fine

frankly, war is hell, that's reality: the civilians lose out

[Ringo876]

I voted for destruction, sounds rad.

[eddie]

*Ring ring: "Yes, hello, we need a Dev with a wink in here, STAT!"*

[bosco_]

I'm all for it.
Yes, a lot more battle damage

[Ironcomatose]

Yeah nothing to serious and no i dont mean destroyable buildings but like buildings that look like there has been a battle going on for hours.

[Dylan]

LMAO! Well the vote stands, everyone wants destruction, and no one doesn't.

[Ironcomatose]

Yeah aside from the L337s everyone wants some level of destruction so put it on your to do list.

[jeffy777]

I say most definitely

[daranz]

I'd agree, provided it's not the WWII style, we-just-unloaded-10-B17s-on-this-town kind of destruction... In other words, collateral damage, and not what Basra would look like after an artillery strike.

[Outlawz7]

Dylan']LMAO! Well the vote stands, everyone wants destruction, and no one doesn't.

Sh1t, voted the wrong :S...so I dont want destruction, lol

[Ironcomatose]

I'd agree, provided it's not the WWII style, we-just-unloaded-10-B17s-on-this-town kind of destruction... In other words, collateral damage, and not what Basra would look like after an artillery strike.

Yeah no like completely bombed out buildings but like buildings with their corners or windows shot out due to a tank round or RPG or something.

[Katarn]

Hmm, well the A10's do cause quite the ruckus i.e. "we-just-unloaded-10-B17s-on-this-town" kind of thing.

[IronTaxi]

i guess one of the biggest things is we dont have enough static modellers!!!!

if there are a few more around give me a PM and we will get you modeling! hehehe