Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
FRAYDO

Introducing the Yakovlev Yak-9P

Recommended Posts

I really appreciate the allied targets being set up 'realistically'.  I also very appreciate KY's style ;):p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should have known there was a reason for delaying the patch. ;)

Excellent choice trying this on Guard Duty, the map really needed something to make it more exciting than, well, guard duty.

Take that 2007! Ten years later, W3D finally offers airplanes! 

Looking forward to the solution to enable them on high-tech maps (Siege was created for airplanes). Also the MiG. Also the to-be-created Allied equivalents. Also me getting triggered by that helipad airfield texture resolution...

Edited by Raap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, OrangeP47 said:

I remember back in the Beta days all the calls of 'it'll never happen'.  Honestly, it's kind of surreal being here.

And I've been upholding those same messages until just 2 months ago as well. It can take a long time for a solution for something like this to pop up, but oh boy, when it does...

The solution unfortunately came too late for me to implement it into the "testing grounds" of Lunar Paradox but I think the VTOL Yak was enough of a teaser :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Raap said:

Looking forward to the solution to enable them on high-tech maps (Siege was created for airplanes). Also the MiG. Also the to-be-created Allied equivalents. Also me getting triggered by that helipad airfield texture resolution...

Thing is, we already had a Yak model and texture on hand, so that was easy to put in as all it needed was the landing gear animation. Not so much with the MiG - we have no assets for that at all. If you're extremely attentive you may have seen a teaser somewhere on this forum that accidentally showed a MiG, but it's a placeholder model that's just being used to prototype the unit's stats just in case we ever end up with all the means to implement it in future.

And I'm not too comfortable with the idea of Allied planes. From what I remember that was just a Chronojam fever dream. We can probably work around the "imbalance" in other ways, like having MiGs on certain naval maps if Cruisers become a reality, as they seem like they'd be a natural counter (CI would need a terrain overhaul to make room for an airfield and for planes to not be able to peer into blue hell, but Hostile Waters could probably have an airfield added with ease), or sticking them on Seamist where the teams' base balance is already intentionally out of whack anyway. On Guard Duty, the Allied Radar Dome you see in the video is the balancing factor against the existence of an Airfield, and anyone who's been paying attention to feedback threads may have some idea as to why a team having a dome could possibly be a good thing and not a hindrance. :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Pushwall said:

Thing is, we already had a Yak model and texture on hand, so that was easy to put in as all it needed was the landing gear animation. Not so much with the MiG - we have no assets for that at all. If you're extremely attentive you may have seen a teaser somewhere on this forum that accidentally showed a MiG, but it's a placeholder model that's just being used to prototype the unit's stats just in case we ever end up with all the means to implement it in future.

And I'm not too comfortable with the idea of Allied planes. From what I remember that was just a Chronojam fever dream. We can probably work around the "imbalance" in other ways, like having MiGs on certain naval maps if Cruisers become a reality, as they seem like they'd be a natural counter (CI would need a terrain overhaul to make room for an airfield and for planes to not be able to peer into blue hell, but Hostile Waters could probably have an airfield added with ease), or sticking them on Seamist where the teams' base balance is already intentionally out of whack anyway.

Airplanes are one of those "Big Deal Additions" that would improve gameplay a lot if both teams had access to them. If Red Alert never featured Hinds but only Longbows, I can easily imagine a counter having been created a decade ago because helicopters are not an insignificant segment of gameplay diversity.

As for asset creation, well I've never in my life created an airplane before so I cannot comment on the complexity.

Edited by Raap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks neat so far. Not sure if outright killing the pilot would be a good idea tbh considering that it's much easier to crash and outright die. But I guess we shall wait and see.

Also I see that my "crash" mechanics idea is in as well :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Raap said:

Airplanes are one of those "Big Deal Additions" that would improve gameplay a lot if both teams had access to them. If Red Alert never featured Hinds but only Longbows, I can easily imagine a counter having been created a decade ago because helicopters are not an insignificant segment of gameplay diversity.

As for asset creation, well I've never in my life created an airplane before so I cannot comment on the complexity.

Not every unit needs to have a counterpart for things to be balanced! For every Yak/Mig in action there is one less Soviet infantry+vehicle on the field! Let's be as Ralistic as possible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Balance wise, they kind of fill that "fast attack vehicle" niche that the Soviets often lack, at the cost of being made of paper and being forced to aim their shots on the fly (no pun intended). Balance doesn't always have to be 1:1 symmetrical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FINALLY THE YAK SOMETHING WE HAVE ALL BEEN WATING FOR FOR YEARS AND HAS BEEN IN RENALERT IN THE ALPHA OF IT NOW THE AIR FEILD LOOKS SOO MUCH BETTER sorry caps because m just  so EXCITED  now all wee need is cruisers but will they add it the world may never knowImage result for illuminati confirmed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That tricky Pushwall. Saying there are no plans for further development and then developing plans right beneath our noses!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, des1206 said:

Not every unit needs to have a counterpart for things to be balanced! For every Yak/Mig in action there is one less Soviet infantry+vehicle on the field! Let's be as Ralistic as possible. 

I'm not talking about balance, not at all.

Let me give an example.

Two kids go to a candy shop, the owner hands one of the two kids a bucket of candy, and the other kid gets nothing.

Or in more game-native terms, a designer creates unique content for one team while giving nothing to the other team.

This is of similar magnitude as when you'd only give naval power to one team, or only helicopters to one team, or only a missile silo to one team. Airplanes aren't just another vehicle, they are a new and unique category of content. If you added a Soviet Super Awesome Mammoth Tank Supreme, the Allied team wouldn't really lose much by not gaining an equivalent since the Soviet Super Awesome Mammoth Tank Supreme doesn't add anything new to the table.

Content diversity helps to keep players interested in the game, which means greater player retention. Not utilizing something like this to the full potential is wasting a big opportunity.

Ye followin'?

 

Edit: From my point of view, adding an Allied equivalent is similar to adding Snipers. They make sense for gameplay appeal purposes.

Edited by Raap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'll get your Allied candy. I guess you haven't been in enough games with ChopBam to realise this :v 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Raap said:

I'm not talking about balance, not at all.

Let me give an example.

Two kids go to a candy shop, the owner hands one of the two kids a bucket of candy, and the other kid gets nothing.

Or in more game-native terms, a designer creates unique content for one team while giving nothing to the other team.

This is of similar magnitude as when you'd only give naval power to one team, or only helicopters to one team, or only a missile silo to one team. Airplanes aren't just another vehicle, they are a new and unique category of content. If you added a Soviet Super Awesome Mammoth Tank Supreme, the Allied team wouldn't really lose much by not gaining an equivalent since the Soviet Super Awesome Mammoth Tank Supreme doesn't add anything new to the table.

Content diversity helps to keep players interested in the game, which means greater player retention. Not utilizing something like this to the full potential is wasting a big opportunity.

Ye followin'?

I guess it comes down to personal preference. Mine ranks Ralism above content diversity. I always loved the C&C games where one side got more air units to play with while the other side got more naval or infantry. Personally, I really don't mind the Soviets being more air dominant while Allies need to rely on creative infantry and ground vehicles use. If we give Allies fighter planes, it will leave a bad taste in my mouth. Is this still Red Alert? Where do we draw the line in terms of creating new units for the sake of fun?

 

Edited by des1206

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Chaos_Knight said:

Also I see that my "crash" mechanics idea is in as well :p

It was already in for the Yak in the first place because it had it when it was on Lunar Paradox. It's not in on helicopters yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Pushwall said:

You'll get your Allied candy. I guess you haven't been in enough games with ChopBam to realise this :v 

The alternative explanation here is that I really just don't do it that much, which Voe refuses to believe. But it's legit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, FRAYDO said:

It should be noted that the Airfield is technically a "Helipad" in the code, making it unlikely to see both buildings on the same map. Nonetheless, we can discuss how to fit the Airfield and Yak into high-tech maps and implementing them in the future.

All the soviet helicopters have wheels, if anyone feels the desire to animate it the helos can land on the runway and taxi off of it like Jerad's large aircraft do. 

Love the model of the Yak though, I plan on being the resident APB ace. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Raap said:

Soviet Super Awesome Mammoth Tank Supreme

 

7 hours ago, Pushwall said:

Allied candy

These are my demands :v

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Yak is amazing to fly, Pushwall has done an amazing job on it!

Allies have more units in other areas, would be a bit silly to give them planes "because". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is great!

I also agree that both sides don't need equivalents. If you want that argument than soviets should have some sort of stealth ground unit. As that is huge.

However, the soviets have their sheer power and might to help balance against that with tesla units coming to mind immediately as a counter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/21/2017 at 10:47 AM, TeamWolf said:

The Yak is amazing to fly, Pushwall has done an amazing job on it!

Allies have more units in other areas, would be a bit silly to give them planes "because". 

Agreed, finally we get a decent non-vtol physics in the W3D engine.

And I have one question.

"WHERE ARE THE MIGS?"

 

...............

...............

................

Its a quote from the last Chinese mission in C&C Generals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/21/2017 at 4:58 PM, SirJustin90 said:

I also agree that both sides don't need equivalents. If you want that argument than soviets should have some sort of stealth ground unit. As that is huge.

To be fair, those two things aren't really comparable. Aircraft have been a ubiquitous asset in all modern armies for almost a century now, while Phase technology is a radically advanced top-secret technology developed by one side and which is not necessarily replicable by the other side, similar to Allied Chronosphere technology (which the Soviets were never able to replicate despite extensive espionage) and Soviet Iron Curtain technology (which the Allies, in turn, couldn't replicate). Plus, realistically there would have been a plethora of various European aircraft available to the Allies during the war, ranging from 1940's-era prop planes and bombers up to some of the very the first jets.

That all being said, however, introducing an Allied fixed-wing aircraft, while cool in theory, could prove difficult to balance well and could just end up messing up the gameplay. The only likely exception to this would be in mission-specific scenarios, and even then it could be kinda iffy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/29/2017 at 8:09 PM, Ice said:

To be fair, those two things aren't really comparable. Aircraft have been a ubiquitous asset in all modern armies for almost a century now, while Phase technology is a radically advanced top-secret technology developed by one side and which is not necessarily replicable by the other side, similar to Allied Chronosphere technology (which the Soviets were never able to replicate despite extensive espionage) and Soviet Iron Curtain technology (which the Allies, in turn, couldn't replicate). Plus, realistically there would have been a plethora of various European aircraft available to the Allies during the war, ranging from 1940's-era prop planes and bombers up to some of the very the first jets.

That all being said, however, introducing an Allied fixed-wing aircraft, while cool in theory, could prove difficult to balance well and could just end up messing up the gameplay. The only likely exception to this would be in mission-specific scenarios, and even then it could be kinda iffy.

The only problem is again, removing all soviet advantages just to give the allies the same thing over and over.

Both sides would reasonably have jeep like vehicles, but didn't in RA, and would kill balance. Both likely had multiple light and heavy tanks, but they again don't in RA and also not for balance.

As well, both surely had flamethrowers, grenades, medical troops, spies.... you see where this would end up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...