The only thing i find strange is that they should have kept that aspect of the engine. Here are examples why: BF2: They had those inflatable boats that you drove around, + they used carriers. If they had kept the engine, they might have been able to make the carriers mobile. BF2142: Isn't it obvious? Titans. Floating through the air. They should have kept the engine so it would be easier to do these things.

yeah but the thing is that if you have people inside a large, moving object, it will produce vast amounts of lagg.
and they did keep the aspect engine and they are using it as well as they can.(the cap ships in space maps are a lot bigger than what you think they are) the bf2142 engine just isn't the most efficient engine around.

different engine

I blame EA.
I blame DICE.

......i find it kinda retarded that they take a game where you COULD do something, then add a sequel where it is impossible. They should have IMPROVED on the engine, not TAKEN AWAY from it.
That's pretty stupid.

different engine

Yes weve established that.

Stardestroyersarecool wrote:

Why not just have it static from the begining?

...is it that hard to figure out? If you just have a ship sitting there, what do you have?

...you have...BattleFront2 -.-

You know S-Guy, reading your posts has made me realize why I really just don't play this mod the way I did GC (and BTW, resisting comparisons between the two is futile). I mean, even in the early days I played the Hoth map and depsite what some say, you could always find a game on that first map. And don't get me wrong, I'll play this mod again when the next release comes out.

But still...I'm longing for GC and I can't figure out why.

See, the ship interiors were my one of my favorite parts of GC too. In fact, the best thing about GC was how so many things were going on on the same map. In a space battle like Tannab, for instance: You have the primary objectives, but others were free to explore other strategies. Boarding, stealing ships, harrassing the enemy in other ways. Was it "REALISTIC"? No, but it was damn fun.

This mod has (or will have) boarding maps, and infantry maps and space maps all with very little room for creative play. The ability to board, in addition to any number of other options available to the soldiers on the battlefield (or in space) is what makes maps fun.

I'm not a mapmaker, modder, or whatever. You guys are the experts.

I'm just your audience.

S-Guy wrote:

Stardestroyersarecool wrote:

Why not just have it static from the begining?

...is it that hard to figure out? If you just have a ship sitting there, what do you have?

...you have...BattleFront2 -.-

...and what do you have when players cannot move around inside a moving vehicle, what do you have?

...you have....Battlefield2142 -.-

I truely lol'd

Stardestroyersarecool wrote:

Why not just have it static from the begining?

...is it that hard to figure out? If you just have a ship sitting there, what do you have?

...you have...BattleFront2 -.-

...and what do you have when players cannot move around inside a moving vehicle, what do you have?

...you have....Battlefield2142 -.-

Why not just have it static from the begining?

...is it that hard to figure out? If you just have a ship sitting there, what do you have?

...you have...BattleFront2 -.-

i prefer to have transport ships for attacking large stationary capital ships. one big battle instead of lots of little ones.

Hey, i got another one of my crazy ideas. For those of you who saw my "Pieces of Capital Ships" Post, think about this: What if all the ships could move around the map like they do now, and then an enemy ship could come up behind a capital ship and disable it's engines, so it would be disabled and immobile. Then you could take some sort of boarding craft and board the disabled ship and take it over. The disabled ship could still have working turrets so it would have some kind of defense, but it would also have interiors because it would not be moving. It could work, couldn't it?

Why not just have it static from the begining?