Okay, I'm back. I want apologize for the lengthy delay in my response, Safe-Keeper. Life tends to throw curve balls at you every once in a while and I recently get one smack dab in the back of the head. lol But I degress. 
Anyway, I'm going to follow up only on the comments that need an explanation, correction or I just plain want to comment on. 
So without further delays, here we go!
Safe-Keeper wrote:mechag2 wrote:2. Smooth the performance and handling of the 74-Z speeder bike so it's much less erratic.
I do hate how it stops on a dime when you release the throttle. Other than that, it's fine with me. Perhaps if you elaborated a bit more on what you meant here, I'd be able to give you a better answer.
Well, basically I mean that the handling feels a bit jerky. Especially, when turning at low speeds. Then again, they don't go anywhere near as fast as they do in the films.
I agree about the deceleration. It comes to a stop quite suddenly without even applying the brakes.
Safe-Keeper wrote:mechag2 wrote:3. Implement a toggle key for manual control over the X-wing's and B-wing's S-foil deployment/retraction.
I frankly don't see why. The devs don't adhere to the idea that s-foils in space have anything to do with max speed, so opening and closing them would have no effect. If you ask me, the s-foils should open when you start the fighter up, for then to never close, not even when you slow down. In space maps, at least. It looks silly to slow your fighter down and watch your s-foils close in the middle of a dogfight.
Think of it this way: B-Wings and A-Wings have two 'modes' - Cruise and Combat. Cruise Mode is for situations outside of combat, Combat mode is entered when the craft enters the battle area. In the case of the space battle over the Sanctuary Moon, for example, they opened their s-foils before even having made contact with the enemy. The s-foils weren't shut again until the battle was over. In First Strike, the fighter is in the battle area when it spawns, and as such should open its s-foils first thing upon being manned and started, and not close them until the round was over.
As I'm sure you're aware by now, I had addressed this when replying to Thexor's comments. I just prefer having full control over it because it's just plain cool and realistic, really. lol If the S-foils were to keep closing every time I apply the brakes, I'd rather them just stay open as well.
I completely agree with you regarding lore accuracy, though. It increases maneaverability as well as the firing arc of the cannons. Not max speed.
Safe-Keeper wrote:mechag2 wrote:4. Implement BF2142's free-look feature in all vehicles.
Definitely. Was it up to me and Ty, you'd also have no external cam .
I can relate to that. lol 
Safe-Keeper wrote:mechag2 wrote:10. Implement the ability to lock-on to targets for warhead launchers (especially for fighters and vehicles).
Depends. I'd like this only if you could enable/disable the lock-on system at will. Sneaking up on an enemy would become impossible if the missiles locked onto the target by themselves when you got behind the target and gave away your position by setting off missile threat alarms. If you can choose when to lock on, though, I'd be all for it 
.
I definately agree with your execution detail. Allowing the system to lock-on or fire "dumb fire" is an option that not only stays faithful to lore, but ads a great gameplay mechanic.
Safe-Keeper wrote:I'm also pondering if you should be able to 'lock on' lasers. If you look at this video, at 2:44 Wedge shoots down a TIE Interceptor, with his lasers not firing straight forward. He just tracks the craft, his X-Wing's computer locks on the enemy fighter, and the lasers are fired so that they hit the target. You see the same thing in the trench run when Vader destroys X-Wings - he just pursues them and lets the computer do the job.
The big question here is whether or not it'd be good for gameplay. It'd certainly make dogfights far more lethal even if locking on took a significant time and you had to aim yourself until then.
Yeah, there were also a few other scenes that demonstrated canon target-tracking capability and it's a technological feature in Star Wars that is definately canon.
As to whether or not it's something that should be implemented for gameplay reasons, I'm not quite certain yet. I've grappled with it for a while. Warhead targeting, definately. Cannon targeting... hmm. I would love to have it implemented to some degree to make the game more intense and faithful to the films, but I would think the whole "phantom hit" bug problem really needs to be resolved first. If it did ever get implemented, more than ever I feel all craft should get a considerable upgrade in speed to more accurately reflect their performance in the films.
I'd love to implement it myself and play around with it and see if it's something that's really doable and what kinks would needed to be ironed out.
Safe-Keeper wrote:mechag2 wrote:11. Add debris and more dramatic vehicle explosions (particularly for space combat maps).
Oh yes. The AT-ST and Bulk Freighter explosion is breathtaking, if every explosion was that good and detailed the mod would be even more awesome than it currently is. The shrapnel should last longer, too, and do damage to you if you hit it. Think about it - shouldn't it hurt a bit to be hit by a huge piece of AT-ST armour flying through the air after you've nailed it? Explosions should do some damage, too, come to think of it.
Funny thing is, the explosions look great with graphics on a low level, but recently I played a space map with the graphics on high and then they just looked strange, not dramatic at all.
Hear! Hear! lol That's interesting about the explosions with max gfx settings. My PC can't handle it so I never got to see it. *sheds a tear then kicks computer*
Safe-Keeper wrote:mechag2 wrote:15. Incorporate a more Star Wars-ish menu & interface design.
Could you elaborate on this one? I like the current one myself.
I had mentioned this in my reply to Thexor, but essentially I'd like to have a console display that looks like the control panels, status displays and readouts we see in the films. Preferably the Imperial ones. I'd also like to include the staple sound fx from the films. Specifically meaning button presses, switch toggles and various other sound fx we here from the displays and monitors. I don't mean just throwing in any Star Wars sound effect just because. Like putting in R2's staple sound fx when you click certain options. lol It's gotta have context accurate to the films.
Safe-Keeper wrote:mechag2 wrote:16. Implement boost functionality for the AT-ST, B-wing, T.I.E. Fighter, Bomber, and Interceptor.
Agree with you on the Imperial fighters, disagree with the AT-ST. It's fast enough as it is.
Well, technically the AT-ST is fast enough in the game, but those suckers are capable of moving much faster. Especially over even terrain (90kph/56mph).
Safe-Keeper wrote:mechag2 wrote:3. Implement the A-wing's 2 Dymek HM-6 concussion missile launchers (6 missiles each).
I think the reason they're not in might be that they'd make the A-Wing overpowered. It's enough of a threat in the battle of Taloraan as it is. Maybe in some maps, but not all?)
Hmmm, I have to disagree. A-wings should definately have the missile launchers, but the T.I.E.s should also be quite a bit faster. Both changes would be more lore accurate and it should balance it out as well. In addition, there should be considerably more Imperial fighters than Rebel fighters in any given map and the respawn rate should be quicker.
Safe-Keeper wrote:mechag2 wrote:7. Correct the Y-wing's maximum proton torpedo payload capacity to 8 (racks of 4 in each launcher)
+
Correct the B-wing's maximum proton torpedo payload capacity to 12 (racks of 6 in each launcher).
Again, very likely a balance feature. Oh, and there's a torpedo shortage. Yeah, there you go, torpedo shortage! That's the ticket 
!)
lol Well, I really doubt this has to do with balance. It sounds more like misinformation. In any case, if necessary, re-balancing could be smoothened by adjusting the amount of damage a torp does.
Safe-Keeper wrote:mechag2 wrote:9. Eliminate the Y-wing's ArMek SW-4 dual ion cannon's laser cannon functionality.
First of all, yes, I agree. Secondly, as a gunner, in my opinion you should be able to have two views to switch between (and external view, since the devs seem very fixed on those) - the view out of the cockpit windows (that is, their POV from where they sit in the cockpits) with mouselook, and the view they currently have, of what the turret sees.
YES!! I completely agree and that's something I was originally expecting when I first played First Strike. I knew I forgot to mention something in my list. lol Especially after seeing that oh-so-awesome T-47 gunner station interior. *slobbers on keyboard* A zoom function probably wouldn't be a bad idea either.
Safe-Keeper wrote:mechag2 wrote:16. Increase the maximum speed of the 74-Z speeder bike by about 25% (it technically has a max speed of about 500kph/310mph).
+
Incorporate the 74-Z speeder bike's maximum flight ceiling of 25 meters/82 feet.
I frankly don't see a need. The bike is a beast as it is - it's ultra-fast, and you can jump just about anywhere with it, and in the hands of a good gunner, it mows down infantry with its laser cannon. It doesn't need to be made even more effective.
Well, I wouldn't say it's ultra-fast, but it is pretty fast. It really should be faster, though. The flight ceiling would be a fantastic feature if implemented properly and balancing could be acheived through the amount of hits taken before being disabled if necessary. Specifically for gameplay, of course.
Safe-Keeper wrote:mechag2 wrote:18. Swap control over the AT-ST's light blaster cannon/concussion grenade launcher and twin laser cannons with the pilot and co-pilot.
I actually prefer to be able to lay down blaster and cannon fire on two different targets, myself, so no thanks.
I think this one is pretty non-negotiable as far as canon goes, but I'm not sure if you understand what I meant. What I meant was that the co-pilot would man the light blaster and concussion 'nade launcher while the pilot operates the twin laser cannons. Without the scope obviously. That would be kept with the co-pilot.
Safe-Keeper wrote:mechag2 wrote:20. Increase the range of the AT-ST's concussion grenade launcher and change it to detonate on impact.
Making it a type of short-range artillery, you mean? I'm not against the idea, we need more long-range weapons in this game.
Well, I really don't mean to turn it in to a mobile long-range artillery vehicle because that's actually not accurate (especially a pretty fast one lol). But the firing range should be increased to about medium range or just a bit over. It's quite bizarre seeing it fire only so many meters before it hits the deck then detonates a couple seconds after. lol
Safe-Keeper wrote:mechag2 wrote:21. Fire-link the T.I.E. Fighter's 2 SFS L-s1 laser cannons.
Yup. But wait, since the TIE Fighter and Interceptors don't have ion cannons or anything, couldn't the F key cycle between different modes of fire? Could be done by having single and linked fire be two different sets of weapons drawing on the same ammunition pool?
Yeah, I sure hope fire-linking cannons is something that can be done. But the standard T.I.E./ln Fighter's two L-s1 cannons are always fire-linked and don't have the option to switch firing modes, just like the Rebel's modified T-47 can't. The T.I.E. Interceptor, on the other hand, can do it like the X-wing can.
Safe-Keeper wrote:mechag2 wrote:22. Implement the dashboards and control consoles for the T.I.E. series' cockpit interiors (Fighter, Bomber & Interceptor) .
Yup. And the POV should be pretty far back in the cockpits.
Definately agree about the pilot's cockpit POV.
Safe-Keeper wrote:mechag2 wrote:23. Increase the maximum speed of the starfighters, transports, frigates & cruisers by about 10-15%.
They're already very, very, very fast as they are. Try to keep up with a Gallofree with your freecam in Battlerecorder .
Yeah, your right about the GR75 and the freecam, but they're all still way too slow. Try zooming by a large craft in a stationary position like the GR75 or even a Star Destroyer at max speed and it's pretty obvious they're all way too slow. Naturally, given the game engine's limitations, it most likely wouldn't be feasable to increase their max speed to reflect the films to a 'T'. Especially with the huge hit detection problem that's been running rampant. But I think it'd be a good call to increase it at least just a little.
Safe-Keeper wrote:mechag2 wrote:26. Implement Endor's signature ambient sound effects (the distinct bird calls and sounds of other indigenous animals).
Think it's already there, just not loud enough to notice. But then again, birds tend to stop singing and start fleeing for their lives when shooting and explosions start anyhow.
There are ambient sfx on Endor like birds chirping and such, but it's all the wrong sounds. Pop in ROTJ and watch a few scenes on Endor without all the action and pay attention to the ambient noise. I think it'll ring a bell. lol
Safe-Keeper wrote:mechag2 wrote:28. Incorporate the various Imperial designed control consoles, lighting systems, technical readout displays, Comm/scan systems, etc. throughout the Imperial facilities on Endor (right now, the building interiors feel barren, like empty store houses and very un-Imperial like).
Agreed. I'm looking forward to a map where you can access the second floor, too .
Absolutely! Working lifts and elevators would be awesome on Endor, as well.
Also, the walkways leading up to the landing pad in the main facility need to be enlarged and redesigned a bit. Right now, we have to crouch and crawl through it as if we were squeezing through a small air shaft instead of walking through a hallway and up a ramp. lol
Safe-Keeper wrote:mechag2 wrote:33. Implement the ability to call in an orbital and/or air strike.
There's no commander in the mod. And even if there was, I'd be very careful with where I implemented artillery strikes. There was no ship giving orbital fire support over the Sanctuary Moon, for example.
True. To tell you the truth as much as I'd like to have this type of feature, the more I think about it the more I'm not certain it's really a good idea.
Safe-Keeper wrote:mechag2 wrote:34. Implement AT-STs on Endor.
Do you mean moving AT-ATs? If so, they weren't in the battle. But then again, neither was 90% of the current map . I'm looking more forward to being able to operate that huge turret, myself .
Yeah, I said AT-STs. That was a stupid mistake on my part. That one wasn't suppose to be included in the list. However, operational AT-ATs on Endor would be freak'n sick! But without environmental damage to topple or destroy the trees, it would render them almost completely useless. 
Environmental damage in a huge online multi-player game like BF & FS would be sooooo awesome, but I can only imagine the problems it would cause. lol I don't think the technology is quite there yet. 
Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.
Closed Alpha Test & Deth..
