PDA

View Full Version : MORE VEHICLES AND BETTER GRAPHICS (duh)


darkjedimonkey
12-21-2007, 08:36 PM
Vehicles
:vsd: :missile: :awing: :racer:

I feel limited on vehicles on both single and multiplayer....
I want more than 7 snowspeeders on Hoth. 17 would be more like it.
More than just two Republic Gunships and AT-TE's on Genoisis.
bigger hangars on spaceships
more at at more at st more at te more at ta etc etc

Graphics
In BF1 they managed to get plants on Theed etc
but on other maps there was barely any realness to the whole thing
more than just a painted sky please.
sort of like Halo graphics only better
:)

deathclone
12-24-2007, 01:05 AM
in other words for this to happen there gonna need WAY bugger maps

darkjedimonkey
12-24-2007, 10:18 AM
not exactly
more vehicles would not mean bigger maps
graphics would though....

GeneralPloKoon
12-27-2007, 03:49 PM
How would graphics mean bigger maps??? More vehicles would equal bigger maps, imagine Hoth exactly the same with 17 snowspeeders, woah! I can't see anything in the sky!!!

darkjedimonkey
12-27-2007, 09:16 PM
hahahahahahahaha
i think 17 snowspeeders would be sweet along with the actual number of at ats.
of course more vehicles would turn the tide of battle with just 200 per army
so more units would have to be involved to equalize that battle

dr.w
01-06-2008, 08:20 PM
starfighters should be re-added to bf3 like in bf1. it isn't as cool with just hoth as the only place with flying vehicles. and they should have larger maps and more troops on each side (with certain advantages for each side like the empire having better weapons but the rebels having better soldiers)

TKT101
01-15-2008, 08:32 PM
Yes I agree with more vehicles for certian maps.

Bs|Rogue52
01-15-2008, 08:57 PM
yes but for that many tanks/vehicles you might as well forget any soldier type, games have been succsesfull without so many vehicles, maybe expand on space, but i like the current number, anymore would be obnoxious and i would avoid servers with those maps, id rather they put there effort into better hit registry and realsitic enviroment.

darkjedimonkey
01-17-2008, 03:54 PM
true

NL_Sudentor
02-01-2008, 02:03 PM
yes but for that many tanks/vehicles you might as well forget any soldier type, games have been succsesfull without so many vehicles, maybe expand on space, but i like the current number, anymore would be obnoxious and i would avoid servers with those maps, id rather they put there effort into better hit registry and realsitic enviroment.


Yes you are right, but maybe they can make vehicles optional. And the numbers too.

Stormtrooper117
04-05-2008, 07:02 PM
I think that they should include vehicles but MAKE THEM ACTUALLY DESTROYABLE!!! It takes too long to destroy the jeep-like vehicles with a rocketlauncher. Small vehicles should only need one hit

NL_Sudentor
04-06-2008, 11:15 AM
I think that they should include vehicles but MAKE THEM ACTUALLY DESTROYABLE!!! It takes too long to destroy the jeep-like vehicles with a rocketlauncher. Small vehicles should only need one hit

There aren't jeep like vehicles in the games!!!
They all have armor

Micahc
04-28-2008, 07:32 PM
I think it does only take 1 rocket to destroy a speeder....

littleman794
04-29-2008, 04:07 PM
ya, speeders cant have that much armor or else they wouldn't be so speedy...

NL_Sudentor
05-01-2008, 02:54 PM
Yeah but speeder isn't a jeep like vehicle

littleman794
05-05-2008, 11:11 AM
no, it is more like a dirt bike type vehicle....except faster with guns....:xp:

darkjedimonkey
06-16-2008, 04:20 PM
ok. more vehicles.

DeathKnight23
06-17-2008, 03:40 AM
ok. more vehicles.

yeah we get the point :lol:

darkjedimonkey
07-19-2008, 05:19 PM
yeah but.... more vehicles means all kinds of vehicles. even gigantic battleships. god. i hope bf3 doesnt suck

Gemini_Thunder
07-20-2008, 06:03 AM
More vehicles would have to equal larger maps. You wouldn't want a bunch of vehicles on a tiny map would you?

darkjedimonkey
07-21-2008, 06:53 PM
How would graphics mean bigger maps??? More vehicles would equal bigger maps, imagine Hoth exactly the same with 17 snowspeeders, woah! I can't see anything in the sky!!!

actually some one already talked about that problem.

RC-1183
07-27-2008, 11:32 PM
ya i say more vehicles but not to many like depending on the map size would determine the amount of vehicles same with troops think about it if u had a HUGE map and only 200 troops it would be too easy to get killed cuz they r spread out to far but more troops would be cool and make it more realistic but wat if they added a RTS type thing too were u could buy more troops if u felt u had insuffeciat numbers but there would have to a limit say 2000??? but u have to remember if they added all this it would take a lot longer for the game to come out

jawathehutt
07-28-2008, 03:15 PM
this is not an rts, or rts hybrid game, from now on, lets just ban rts related ideas.

Bs|Rogue52
07-28-2008, 05:38 PM
this is not an rts, or rts hybrid game, from now on, lets just ban rts related ideas.


I agree, please go to the EAW forums for those ideas.

GeneralPloKoon
07-30-2008, 04:26 PM
Indeed.

shukkoku
08-02-2008, 11:05 PM
I think that they will have to WORK to meet our expectations with graphics, but it can be done. If they have mediocre graphics the fans will tare them apart so they are really put on the spot.
and I'm just going say this now. I think that the vehicles are too powerful. half the time I'm getting mowed down by a tank, so that being said I think they should have more vehicles but make them weaker.
Also I think they're should be a mode with No vehicles what so ever.

Bs|Rogue52
08-03-2008, 08:05 AM
I think they're should be a mode with No vehicles what so ever.

I agree.

However good gameplay > good graphics.

GeneralPloKoon
08-03-2008, 04:40 PM
Or an option to turn off vehicles. Custom settings!

NL_Sudentor
08-05-2008, 04:30 AM
I think that they will have to WORK to meet our expectations with graphics, but it can be done. If they have mediocre graphics the fans will tare them apart so they are really put on the spot.
and I'm just going say this now. I think that the vehicles are too powerful. half the time I'm getting mowed down by a tank, so that being said I think they should have more vehicles but make them weaker.
Also I think they're should be a mode with No vehicles what so ever.

Indeed, but that is the meaning of an tank he.

They should ban the boost option with tanks and they alson need to make them slower.

Or AT missiles need to be stronger and maybe (like the battlefield 2 concept)
place some bazooka stations so u don't have to be only rocket unit

GeneralPloKoon
08-05-2008, 03:02 PM
Rocket Turrets! Thats what we need!

Bokken
08-05-2008, 04:17 PM
They'd just go boom after AT-AT missiles hit them...

jawathehutt
08-05-2008, 05:21 PM
so dont put atats on every map then

GeneralPloKoon
08-06-2008, 05:52 PM
A AT-AT on Endor would be funny they would get caught on a tree and explode!

Bokken
08-06-2008, 07:37 PM
I didn't only mean AT-ATs, that was a mis-type. Most tank missiles destroy turrets of any type by the second missile launch.

GeneralPloKoon
08-06-2008, 09:55 PM
But it would be funny....to blow the turrets up!

jawathehutt
08-06-2008, 10:39 PM
But if the tanks health was lowered, then a good ambush could destroy the tank before it knew what hit it

RC-1183
08-09-2008, 10:48 AM
exactly just like tht but he has a point wat if they put at ats on a map where they couldnt opperate all that well but they could still use their turrets but if they moved they blew up

NL_Sudentor
08-10-2008, 09:48 AM
And I don't know if its difficult to make but why don't make the vehicles on a way that every part on it could be destroyed!!

For example: If u shoot rocket on the gun turret that it can't be used any longer because it is destroyed but the tank stil go's on and is less effective in battle

GeneralPloKoon
08-10-2008, 04:40 PM
Very good idea.

RC-1183
08-12-2008, 02:38 PM
ya exactly why not or if u shot on of the 6 legs on a at-te then it couldnt move but it could shoot

GwannaSauna
10-27-2008, 02:12 AM
To add a great vehicle that would turn the tide in any battle...

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Add a pilotable/drivable capital ship! For example:

"Press Y/Triangle/F10 to enter [Mon Calamari Cruiser]"

*enter Mon Cal*

Positions:
Pilot (Pliots the ship, duh!)
Co-Pilot (Keeps track of the weapon and health systems, command crew etc.)
Gunner 1 (Turbolaser)
Gunner 2 (Turbolaser)
Gunner 3 (Ion Turbolaser)
Gunner 4 (Turbolaser)
Gunner 5 (Turbolaser)
Gunner 6 (Turbolaser)
Gunner 7 (Ion cannon)
Gunner 8 (Twin turbolaser)
Gunner 9 (Rapid-fire turbolaser)
Gunner 10 (Heavy hangar gunner [left])
Gunner 11 (Heavy hangar gunner [right])
Gunner 12 (Rear gunner)
Technican 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 (Repairs ship when damaged; carries a blaster pistol)
Commander (Orders troops; carries a commando pistol)
Troop garrisons x20 (Protects the ship; each garrison has 5 troops)
Pilots x15 (Pilots starfighters in the hangar [Ships: X-Wing, B-Wing etc.])
Civilians x40 (Sleeps, eats, runs around when danger arises)

Oh yeah, and the added feature of hangar-to-hangar fighting (for example: like in episode IV where the Tantive IV was invaded by an ISD)


Oh yeah, and bigger space maps!!!!!

THAT would make the ultimate space battle!!!

jawathehutt
10-27-2008, 05:03 PM
The only tiny little problem with your plan is that 1. Theres rarely even that many people in servers just to man the turrets and fly the ship and 2. Who would ever want to be a position like civilian or technician, when I play video games I tend to want to do something as opposed to wait and around and wish something was happening.
The idea of a pilotable cap ship is cool(and often stated), but to pull it off it would have to be simplified quite a bit from your idea.

LordOfTheFish
10-27-2008, 07:55 PM
I'll stick to the single/double piloted ships.

Bokken
10-28-2008, 09:45 AM
Not even too many people want to do double positioned ships except for Snowspeeders and Transport Ships. If they can help it, they never double-pilot a Bomber.

shukkoku
02-02-2009, 11:32 AM
maybe just having one person plot the route of the capitol ship, then it moves and every one is happy.

joesdomain
03-04-2009, 10:50 PM
More vehicles is the good idea. I was disappointed alot of vehicles were left out from the previous games. Playable millenium falcon, slave I and B-wings are example.

Bokken
03-05-2009, 12:09 AM
Oh, darn, this game doesn't have enough cheap secondary-fire-button-spamming annoying as hell vehicles for you? Because everyone who chats on the big servers either complains about tankers or is a tanker.

LordJhredmo
03-05-2009, 09:33 AM
Like I said before: More LAATis for ground conflicts (and, of course, appropriate equivalent transports for other factions)!

Bokken
03-05-2009, 01:17 PM
You know, I actually don't think that ground-air transport ships is such a bad idea, providing that measures are taken to ensure that they aren't spammed like the Snowspeeders on Hoth.

LordJhredmo
03-05-2009, 02:21 PM
Exactly. Two or something, depending on map size, but seeing the leaked footage tells me that the number of ships attacking/landing may not even be a problem.

joesdomain
03-08-2009, 05:42 PM
I personally want to see more maps where I can use AT-AT and AT-ST Walkers other than Hoth and Endor. I want to see those maps enlarged and updated with more detail. Maybe with terrain that is actually slick, muddy, swampy. Basically show the effects of weather and terrain on the soliders, vehicles, starships, etc. Nothing says funny like a stormtrooper slipping and falling down a steep slick hill or getting stuck in mud.

Bokken
03-08-2009, 05:59 PM
Wow, that doesn't sound hard to engineer or anything...

Nietzsche's God
03-09-2009, 04:51 PM
The vehicle that General Grievous drove in the episode III would be a nice addition to the game.

Lordofthefish, nice pic of Toshiro Mifune. Great actor. Was that from "Sanjuro"?

LordJhredmo
03-10-2009, 09:14 PM
The vehicle that General Grievous drove in the episode III would be a nice addition to the game.


I never thought about that before. That's a fantastic idea. I'd love to fly through the Utapau streets in that Tsmeu-6.

Bokken
03-11-2009, 10:37 AM
When put that way, I wouldn't mind seeing Darth Maul's Scimitar in space (or the Millennium Falcon) or Dooku's Flitknot Speeder.

TSR
03-12-2009, 04:53 PM
So you are suggesting Hero vehicles? I.e Vader's TIE, Luke's X-wing, Jango/Boba's KSE Firespray etc?

LordJhredmo
03-12-2009, 06:33 PM
Sure. Why not? Just have one per map (for canonical purposes). It spices things up.

Darth Eclipse
03-13-2009, 01:33 PM
PLEASE stop making threads about what you want to be in Star Wars Battlefront 3. Just post your ideas in an older one.

I do agree that there needs to be more vehicles in SWBF 3.




P.S. How do you guys say Star Wars Battlefront 3 the "short" way. Like SWB 3, or SWBF 3, or whatever. StWaBa 3??? :D

:axe1:

LordJhredmo
03-13-2009, 03:38 PM
I say BFIII... It's the closest acronym to the name, so doy...

TSR
03-13-2009, 04:41 PM
There's been more threads about BFIII possibilities than there are numbers, but its keeping some activity on the forum, so go with it :)

M@RS
03-13-2009, 11:26 PM
PLEASE stop making threads about what you want to be in Star Wars Battlefront 3. Just post your ideas in an older one.

I do agree that there needs to be more vehicles in SWBF 3.




P.S. How do you guys say Star Wars Battlefront 3 the "short" way. Like SWB 3, or SWBF 3, or whatever. StWaBa 3??? :D

:axe1:

Bring back an old thread? That has :newbie: all over it... You don't bring back old threads... ;)

GeneralPloKoon
03-13-2009, 11:51 PM
So you are suggesting Hero vehicles? I.e Vader's TIE, Luke's X-wing, Jango/Boba's KSE Firespray etc?

That wouldn't be fair, i'd camp the Firespray spawn. :p

TSR
03-14-2009, 06:19 AM
That wouldn't be fair, i'd camp the Firespray spawn. :p

I'd find where you live and punch you.
:xp:

Bokken
03-14-2009, 11:29 AM
I have no idea what Firespray is, but whatev...I think that "Hero" vehicles should only be implemented if there are indeed heroes, and (if they are implemented) that only the Hero/Villain should be able to ride it.

GeneralPloKoon
03-14-2009, 11:57 AM
I have no idea what Firespray is, but whatev...I think that "Hero" vehicles should only be implemented if there are indeed heroes, and (if they are implemented) that only the Hero/Villain should be able to ride it.
This is a awesome Firespray.
http://images.wikia.com/starwars/images/0/01/Jango_version_Slave_1.jpg

jawathehutt
03-14-2009, 01:13 PM
Couldnt you have just said like a slave 1 ship or something for us ignorant folk

LordJhredmo
03-14-2009, 03:38 PM
Couldnt you have just said like a slave 1 ship or something for us ignorant folk

Qwut'd fer trewth!

GeneralPloKoon
03-14-2009, 03:42 PM
Couldnt you have just said like a slave 1 ship or something for us ignorant folk
:xp:

Bokken
03-14-2009, 06:20 PM
For the second time, I looked at the title of this thread. It occurs to me that, according to the movies, there really aren't too many more vehicles to implement into the game. A couple of specialized vehicles, yes, but based on the few eras that are actually included, they've about been exhausted. Except that the speeder vehicles like the STAP only show up on CTF maps.

LordJhredmo
03-14-2009, 08:58 PM
I think there should be a few more. At least to be size appropriate to the number of units (e.g., 200 units - 4 of each single-unit vehicle - 2 of each multi-unit vehicle). Just for the sake of that many more players/units being able to use them and see them to scale with the battle. Especially considering the newer engine and system specifications for BFIII, I would expect something like that, but again, "it is LucasArts."

Bokken
03-14-2009, 10:17 PM
So true. I'm not much of a fan of those overpowered "hold down the secondary fire button" tanks.

M@RS
03-15-2009, 11:17 AM
They should make it so that when you're a Jedi and you get in a ship there should certain times where you can use the force to deflect missiles, move ships, etc.

TSR
03-15-2009, 11:24 AM
Couldnt you have just said like a slave 1 ship or something for us ignorant folk

SPACE SHIP BOUNTY HUNTER PEW PEW

thar?

LordJhredmo
03-15-2009, 12:21 PM
They should make it so that when you're a Jedi and you get in a ship there should certain times where you can use the force to deflect missiles, move ships, etc.

That's almost worse than vampire health.

GeneralPloKoon
03-15-2009, 03:03 PM
They should make it so that when you're a Jedi and you get in a ship there should certain times where you can use the force to deflect missiles, move ships, etc.
Sound like Jedi Starfighter...i'd rather not have force powers + super powerful flying starfighter.

jawathehutt
03-16-2009, 12:20 AM
I'm a fan of more battlefield/joint ops vehicles, where theyre powerful yes, but theyre also pretty easily countered. Adding air vehicles to ground battles is a good way to do this as long as they lower their damage and health, because I'm sure everyone whose ever played a mod map with ground and air vehicles on it, an arc 170 can take down even an ATAT with one single attack run using pretty much only their lasers. They also need to be more susceptible to grenades and especially rockets, it should take 3 rocket hits max to take out a medium tank, 2 from the side and 1 from behind of under, otherwise theyre just too powerful.

GeneralPloKoon
03-16-2009, 12:41 PM
What I liked about Hoth on Battlefornt II, you could lock on to snowspeeders with a rocket and take them out with one shot, or maybe it was two...

Bokken
03-17-2009, 08:45 AM
It's just one shot, and those rockets will follow them for a long time.

GeneralPloKoon
03-17-2009, 11:29 AM
It's just one shot, and those rockets will follow them for a long time.

I remember in Battlefront I, pilots healed vehicles while inside them, people would shoot rockets at me constantly and I would never die, it was awesome. But If air vehicles are to return to gorund levels, the rockets need to be super powerful.

jawathehutt
03-17-2009, 05:18 PM
Except only against vehicles because other wise rocket noobing will be even worse and youll get more people bitching at every other class because they cant aimlessy fire rockets without killing their teammates who are actually like aiming or something productive near the enemy.

joesdomain
03-19-2009, 09:21 PM
The weapon used to fix vehicles looked wierd. I say get rid of it and have the troop that does the fixing just fix it without it. Just give the ability to everyone. PS2 had alot of choppy graphics that showed when their was an explosion or alot of activity in a particular area. Maybe add the ability to actually crawl underneath vehicles and set mines or grenades would be cool. Rambo style! LOL!

LordJhredmo
03-20-2009, 01:06 AM
The weapon used to fix vehicles looked wierd. I say get rid of it and have the troop that does the fixing just fix it without it. Just give the ability to everyone. PS2 had alot of choppy graphics that showed when their was an explosion or alot of activity in a particular area. Maybe add the ability to actually crawl underneath vehicles and set mines or grenades would be cool. Rambo style! LOL!

I totally don't agree. What I think would be best is to limit the engineer class by removing ammo/health packs and creating a new class: Medic or Support Trooper. A class that has excellent healing/supplies creating/using abilities, but with a fairly good weapon.


"Medic!"
-212th Attack Battalion Soldier

No cutting under a vehicle... that doesn't even happen anywhere, other than on Hoth where Luke used his lightsaber to open the bottom and toss a thermal detonator inside. That wouldn't work in the game. Too ridiculous. Also, it isn't Rambo. It's the grunt basic troopers.

Redtech
03-20-2009, 06:11 PM
Or do the BF2142 method where the default infantry carries a few medpacs when upgraded and the anti-tank troop can actually fix vehicles!

joesdomain
03-20-2009, 09:17 PM
Personally I think making the graphics more realistic in a PS3 and X-box 360 version like allowing a trooper to throw a thermal detonator at a tree and have it blow it in half and fall on top of someone. That would be cool. Have a detonator thrown in a body of water and it explodes water all over the place rendaring area soliders blind by the water temporary.