LOFT: Try to answer the question: "What really made the game interesting in the role of the gunners?"

[Freycinet]

6) Another question is about gunners accuracy: in CloD use the gunner position was a waste of time, in RoF we have a free movement of the gun (although moving the mouse seems to me a little uncoordinated). As I enjoy very much to play as a gunner I would see again something near the IL2 approach in this issue. What is planned for BoS?
 
We don't know yet. We'll consider the mistakes that we made in the ROF and the experience that we got, but of course, it will be make more interesting than it was in the original "IL-2". I would be very grateful if community to share your thoughts about this question in a separate thread. Try to answer the question: "What really made the game interesting in the role of the gunners."

Edited February 2, 2013 by Freycinet

[Ribbs]

To start things off.. I would say make the the gun axis mappable to the mouse. It seems the most universal easiest way. I believe the original IL2 had this.. but for some reason they abandoned it for CLOD.

[Freycinet]

On my own behalf I can say that the essential necessity for gunner modelling to be a success is to have a compelling reason to jump into multi-engine planes.

 

This requires:

- 1) Well-modelled planes.

- 2) Trouble-free join-up in planes for several players. Possibility for pilot to throw out gunners who "misbehave". Impossibility of shooting own plane. 

- 3) Gameplay that rewards taking up these planes (to win a mission/map, for instance).

- 4) Simple and trouble-free use of the guns. I would say mouse-control and "looking-down-the barrel" immediately you jump into the gunner position. Why would you need to CHOOSE "looking-down-the-barrel" view after jumping into the gunner position? - 99% of the time you go to that position just so that you can shoot the gun! Sightseeing can be done just fine while you swing the gun around. Also, no separate controls to turn turret and gun. Just use the mouse for all the control. But ensure that the gun aim can only be changed at a historical speed (traverse speed).

Edited February 1, 2013 by Freycinet

[JG4_Sputnik]

Hi Freycinet,

 

I agree with

 

1)

3)

 

2: Its important to be able to shoot the own plane. Otherwise you can shoot like Rambo without thinking about your own planes safety. I think this would be too arcade-ish. Though I don?

Edited February 1, 2013 by Sputnik

[SYN_Haashashin]

Hi guys, I agree with all that have been said so far. I miss my time as a gunner in a B-17, hopefully someday I can revive my young years in the tail gun of the B-17 hehehehe.

 

Back to topic,

About number two, I think RoF handle this very good, in his own way. Letting you lock the gunners position as you start your flight and then unlocking when a known person want to join in, works just nice to stop those persons that like to shoot your plane up jumping in your plane. The impossibility of shotting at your own plane wont be good at all, too arcadish.

[LukeFF]

Personally, I'm happy with the way turrets are implemented in ROF and would be perfectly fine if this same methodology was incorporated into BoS.

Edited February 1, 2013 by LukeFF

[HippyDruid]

I agree with pretty much everything posted here except the gunner not being able to damage their own plane. I think that would be a little silly.

 

The gunners controls must be able to be controlled with a mouse. And the option to use your RAW mouse input is a defninite must!! Mouse smoothing is a no no!! Have the option, sure, but don't force people to use it.

 

The current RoF system of locking/unlocking the seat would be fine in my opinion.

I don't think it's necessary for the pilot to have the ability to throw out the gunner afterwards. If you let them in your plane, you should live or die with the consequences of their actions.

On that note, prehaps by default, the gunners seat could be locked and the pilot would unlock it on request. This way greifers can't just jump in and suprise a pilot who forgot to lock the seat.

A simple button, bound to lock/unlock, without forcing someone to go into the game menus would be best. 

 

I'm still undecided about the way RoF limits the speed of movement of the gun, based on the mechanics of the gunners rotating mechanism. Limiting the arc of fire is perfectly fine in my opinion.

This has it's pro's and cons for realism of course, but I also think it's the major reason why the mouse movement for gunners in RoF is so unintuitive. It's much better than it used to be of course, but still, it's by no means perfect.

 

A happy compromise between realism and fun for the gunners role needs to be considered. Without making them too overpowered.

I think this issue will probably be what makes or breaks the gunning aspect. 

Edited February 2, 2013 by HippyDruid

[Freycinet]

Why would it be important to able able to shoot your own plane? Do you think it ever happened in WWII? I don't think so and never heard it. Sure it happened with Sean Connery in "Indiana Jones", but I never heard of other instances...  

 

I think "looking-down-the-barrel" should be the default position when entering the gunner station because that will make life easier for the 99 percent of players who want it like that. I would agree that it would be fine to have a keyboard combo which would allow decoupling of view and gun control. But that should be done by a particular keyboard combo learnt by the few who want to use that opportunity. It shouldn't be the default setting when entering a gunner station. 

[Sokol1]

To start things off.. I would say make the the gun axis mappable to the mouse. It seems the most universal easiest way. I believe the original IL2 had this.. but for some reason they abandoned it for CLOD.

 

Although poorly implemented: too slow, mouse axis inverted (yes, you can use mouse to aim guns...), I like of was proposed in CloD.

 

Good points: Unlock turret if required, recharge gun, rotate turret independent of gun in planes that have this feature, what allow more angle of fire.

 

Implement in BoS: If pilot jump to gunner position, automatic engage auto level feature, is not supposed that gunner shoot and handle the plane at the same time, as happened in IL-2 1946.

 

Sokol1

[4Shades]

It is important to be able to damage your own plane because that is what actually happened if you were careless.

 

I think default "gunsight view" is good, as long as we also have the option to click in and out for looking around with TiR or mouse/numpad looks.

 

If there is a way to optionally limit angular range and rate of gun movement according to historical values, that would be wonderful.

 

And I agree with Sokol that piloting the plane while shooting the rear gun is pretty gamey.

 

Cheers,

4S

[JtD]

If I am to use a slightly different perspective - would I rather have 3 bombers with just the pilot station or 1 bomber with 5 crew stations, which might be the same amount of work. I must say this would be a pretty tough decision.

 

I like gunner pits, I like to be able to defend my plane myself, to check my 6, I like it to take a tour of the plane. It's fun to sometimes not bother about the flying, but just observe. To me the plane would feel incomplete if I could not man the guns myself. All this just single player, the most fun I had with gunners was in multi player with the entire bomber manned by humans. It gives a team experience that's just awesome. I very much liked how it was/is done in original Il-2.

[GAVCA/Jambock__28]

Although poorly implemented: too slow, mouse axis inverted (yes, you can use mouse to aim guns...), I like of was proposed in CloD.

 

Good points: Unlock turret if required, recharge gun, rotate turret independent of gun in planes that have this feature, what allow more angle of fire.

 

Implement in BoS: If pilot jump to gunner position, automatic engage auto level feature, is not supposed that gunner shoot and handle the plane at the same time, as happened in IL-2 1946.

 

Sokol1

 

I agree.

 

Also, damage model must be present at the gunner position. The principal feature of a bomber (the difference betwen the good ones and bad ones) was the angles offered for defence, it is because this that bombers with rotatory ventral and tail position for gunners were superb in self-defense. 

 

A interesting video:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pVLCzMETx8

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

As an experienced bomber pilot and gunner I tell you that the biggest challenges to a gunner is deflection shot due to the enemy fighters speed and limited ammo restrictions.

 

If you can create gunner mechanics where you have limited ammo, field of fire, reload weapon and unjamming options that would be great. It is very important also to be able to see around and not only through the crosshairs. You should research if was possible or not to damage your own plane and model it.

 

The original IL2 series was great for gunners it had everything above but jamming and unjamming guns, limited ammo load procedures like reloading 75 bullets drumms versus belt fed machine guns.

 

You cannot forget about a realistic damage model for enemy fighters. It is the most important part about this gunner business or you will model a position that people will not use due to problems like this. Back on IL2 it was impossible to damage a LA5 with a your twins 7.7mm mgs on a Stuka for example. You had to fire a thousand rounds to make a scratch on russian planes. When firing against american and british planes you could put their engines to smoke with a single well aimed burst.

 

So if you had an american or british fighter on your tail, you could jump to gunner position and try to disable their engines. But if you had a russian plane, you should stay on pilot seat and try to avoid every enemy firing attack and pray to your AI gunner hit a lucky shot on enemy pilot face !!!

Edited February 3, 2013 by JG62Gielow

[Sokol1]

...that piloting the plane while shooting the rear gun is pretty gamey

 

 

In the Russian side of this forum are a [interesting proposal: that (human) gunner send (keys) commands to (auto) pilot to do defensive maneuvers.

 

And, that IA gunner send "intercom" calls to (human) pilot to do defensive maneuvers to avoid fighters attacks.

 

On interview whit Gregory Maximovich Ryabushko 828th GSHAP he say that the appear of rear gunner on IL-2 reduce his losses for enemy fighters, not only due the defensive fire,

but because pilot can be maneuver to avoid attacks according gunner calls.

 

Sokol1