Closed Alpha Test & Deth..
Re: A Comprehensive List of Suggestions & Critiques
Alrighty, thanks for the responses guys. 
I'm going to try and respond to as many as I can, but I might have to come back later for the rest. 
First off, regarding #34 on the "Lore List" (add AT-STs on Endor)... oh brother, that was stupid. 
That wasn't meant to be included in my post. lol I've gone ahead and edited it out. 
1) Yes, this would be useful. There are currently little white lines, but they don't indicate which direction is up or down so much as tell you that you're not level. In vanilla, this is good enough - it doesn't really work for space fights so well.
I know there is technically no up or down in space (which is why I put apostrophes ), but given the limitations of the game's HUD readout and the nature of the game FS is based off of, I thought it would be an easier way to reveal the pilot's orientation rather than completely redo the HUD readout and tweak some of the existing elements to do the task properly. I don't know if 2142's engine is capable of that or not.
Atmospheric combat maps, on the other hand, would do well to have the notches. From what I understand, typically, a planet's North & South axis provide the "up" and "down" orientation in space for a ships navi-computer and other systems.
2) Yeah, might be an idea, if it's possible. I don't know just how powerful the mod tools are... if it was easily possible, then it would have been done already. Still would be nice.
I was kinda thinking the same thing you are. Hopefully it was just overlooked or the the time just wasn't available to refine it prior to release, but again, it's possible that the limitations of 2142's game engine have reared it's ugly head. lol
As of now, the 74-Z performs a bit jerky in it's handling and doesn't quite reflect the capability it had in ROTJ as well as it should, IMHO.
3) I don't like this one. There's no reason to not deploy the foils, seeing as the mod does its best to cut down on travel time. There are better things that our hotkeys could be linked to, and better things for the mods to be doing. At the very least, this should be under Lore suggestions.
This one isn't a necessity, really. It's really more of a personal preference, I guess you can say. Your right though, this one should really be in the lore section.
I prefer to have full control over the S-foils because:
a) as of now, enemy fighters can more easily see when you're throttling down and make appropriate adjustments because the S-foils close when doing so. Then they blast you out of the stars.
b). I prefer having full control over it because I LOOOOOOVE realism. 
I completely agree with both your's and Safe-Keeper's response regarding this, though. (I'll get to your response as soon as I can, Safe and thanks for posting your comments again ) But again, I'd prefer to have full control or not at all. I don't like the dead giveaway (pun intended) that I'm throttling down.
Don't worry, I'm fully aware that the "close S-foils to increase max speed" gameplay mechanic is nothing more than that, a gameplay mechanic and isn't lore accurate.
4) I admit that I rarely use free look. Personally, I find many of the outside cameras to be a bit cheap - if the TIE doesn't have a rear-view mirror, why should you? Then again, as I say, I don't know how free look differs from normal cameras, so I'll try to shut up on this one. Hard for me to do, though
Actually, I think you're thinking of the exterior rear view camera. Free-look is when you hold down a key (default key is left-CTRL in 2142 vanilla) when in cockpit view so you can look around the cockpit interior using the mouse. It comes in VERY hand for spotting enemies who are trying to flank you or get a leg up in maneuvering and also gives you better situational awareness. Plus it's realistic and seeing more of the detailed cockpit interiors kicks butt.
5) Yes! It's kind of hard to tell some vehicles apart, and knowing what vehicle you're looking at would be great. If it doesn't take too much artist time, then great.
Yeah, some of the icons have a passing resemblence to the craft/vehicle they represent and some are hard to recognize.
6) This would be useful, but not crucial - just look at the orientation of your body on the minimap, relative to your line-of-sight cone. Still, a HUD indicator would be nice... we can make do until the art team can do it, though, and we'll survive if it doesn't happen at all.
I agree, but like you said, it'd be nice.
7) Yeah, I'd really like to know what exactly I'm selecting. Would definately help out us new recruits to the mod - experts know what's what, but anyone who hasn't either a) played for months or b) hasn't memorized the manual will have no clue what the heck those items are.
It would definately be more user friendly.
8) Once again, this sounds so simple and so obvious that, if it was actually easy to implement, it would already be done. If it's something that's been overlooked, then add it already! If it's hard to do, though, then leave it for now. There are better things to do, and most new players will figure out that they can't launch the droid and forget about it. Either that, or they'll be told to squad up
I'm hoping things like this (and a few others) are just a result of the dev team hustling to get this great mod out to the public, who were absolutely rabid for it's release (myself included). lol
I agree, though. If it's difficult to implement, considering it's rather simplistic purpose, I'd rather have them focus on implementing more important things. There IS a manual, afterall. lol
9) Camera views are from Vanilla. Either it's something that the team hasn't worried about, or it's something hardcoded into BF2142 that can't be changed.
This one I'm a bit concerned about. I personally like to fly within the cockpit, but sometimes I feel the urge to see my ship kick some butt from an exterior view and I do NOT like the way DiCE had incorporated the exterior camera views for aircraft in any of the BF games. It makes combat from a chase view much trickier than it should be. I'm hoping it's something that can be modified so it fits more along the lines of a flight simulator's exterior camera system.
10) Locking on? There's something more interesting about actually having to aim weapons, rather than having them aim themselves. Lock-on systems tend to make fights long-range, because the weapons are more accurate - I kinda like up-close and personal battles (hence my suggestion for interior maps - shameless plug, I know). It wouldn't be much use for fighters, either - I have enough trouble keeping a foe in my sights long enough to fire blasters, let alone trying to lock on to a target first!
I know what you're saying and I agree with you, but I'm not referring to a ship's targeting computer's ability to track moving targets and assist in hitting it with cannons (which actually don't work like how you described). I meant warheads specifically, such as proton torpedoes and concussion missiles. Adjustments could be made (hopefully) to make it more gameplay friendly such as lock on time, range, tracking and damage done. Personally, I think this feature should be included regardless. If it's even possible. lol
Typically, warheads such as proton torpedoes and concussion missiles, are used against capital ships, escorts, installations and tight formations of fighters and are a waste against one or two fighters considering the sheer destructive power they unleash. Not to mention the cost.
11) Vehicle explosions would be awesome. I really was saddened the first time I crashed a speeder bike, and all I got as a reward was a little flash and *poof!* the bike was gone. Capital ships have plenty of debris, and AT-ST's have great remains - now, let's get that for the rest of the mod! ...once the art team has time, of course.
lol Yeah, I was a bit disappointed with the speederbike's "Kasplode!", too. I would love to see the appropriate, recognizable parts/debris flying every which way to the craft or vehicle that they came from. *drools*
12) I think the problem is that the map doesn't save any stats. The debriefing screen has nothing to show, because nothing was kept. If there's some way for the mod to have its own ranking servers, then this may be fixed - assuming that the rank servers and the like are hardcoded or otherwise unchangable, the debriefing screen will remain blank forever. Then again, most of us never even look at it
Hmmm, that might be it. But than again, even when playing single player on 2142 vanilla, pics of your most used troop class, weapon, vehicle, etc. is displayed. I assume there's a way to incorporate the appropriate pics of Star Wars troop classes, weapons, etc. because 2142's were removed for FS.
13) Yeah, there's a fair bit of trouble on the loading screens. Someone insisted on putting "quotes" around most of the text, and I always get bugged by the lack of apostrophies and other minor problems. For example, on Escape from Hoth: "Lucking, the bases crew" should have "base's". Let's use the possessive, people! Apostrophies FTW!
lol I don't know how to mod, but by golly, I'd be willing to correct the grammar, spelling and proper terms myself! To the best of my knowledge that is.
14) The AT-AT on Endor will probably get a new model once the model is finished. There's a dynamic model being designed for Hoth that, according to the main page article, should be better than the current static. Hopefully, this means that the current statics will be getting a bit of lovin' - but we may as well 'remind' the art team, in case they 'forgot.'
That's what I figure, but I thought I should include it "just in case".
15) More Star Wars-ish? How so? The little details (Like, "Deploying to Battle of Taaloran[sp?]") already make a different feel. I've said it before, but I'll repeat myself: I don't know how much the modders can actually change. Could we get the 2142 unlocks and ranks off the main page? The menus have already been rethemed somewhat. What do you think needs more work?
I don't know if LucasArts has any stipulations and Star Wars material can and cannot be used (like John Williams' awesome score or various weapon/engine sound fx?), but I was thinking along the lines of adding more recognizable sound fx when navigating through the menu and implementing a design style similar to any of the various control panel displays we've seen in the films.
Again, I don't even know if it's possible. *sigh*
16) I believe the lack of a boost on those vessels is intentional, not an oversight. The B-Wing already has the most firepower of any Rebel vessel, and one of the (if not the) highest armour. Add in a boost function, and that thing will be soloing capital starships. The AT-ST is slow-but-powerful, which is nice. I admit that they did seem to move faster than AT-ATs in the movie rendition of Hoth... but that might have been perspective on my part. Either way, they don't need a boost. For the Imperial starships, having no boost on the Bomber, at least, is fine - I wouldn't mind it on TIE Fighters/Interceptors, or at the very least on Interceptors, which should be really fast... but they're pretty fast already. They compensate for the lack of a boost by having a great normal top speed.
I'm pretty certain the lack of boost for these craft was intentional as well, but considering what craft they are and what craft did get a boost function, I think they should have boost incorporated as well to stay more faithful to lore (it still wouldn't trample gameplay).
Personally, I'd much rather have boost completely eliminated for vehicles and have the max speed ramped up considerably to accurately reflect the films. But then we have to make sure to deal with the oh-so-horrible hit detection bugs for the space combat maps and then the laaaaaaag. So that might not be feasable. 
Believe me, one B-wing wouldn't be able to take on a capital ship by itself. Not if the proper adjustments are made let alone with a T.I.E. escort.
AT-STs are actually pretty fast when moving over even terrain (max speed is about 90kph/56mph over even terrain). Endor isn't a good example of their speed because of the situation they had to deal with: pursuing lots of frantically fleeing Ewoks while having to navigate the complex terrain as well as avoid the trees.
If the boost functionality is to stay, the T.I.E. series craft should definately have it (including the Bomber). In addition, the max speed should probably be upped a bit for the T.I.E. Fighter & Interceptor.
As for lore... I really know very little. I'll touch on the few I know something definitive, because I know that the lore experts (read: fanatics, but you didn't hear that from me) will probably be able to comment on the rest.
I loooove studying Star Wars technology and lore (but still keep it in perspective, it is only a space fantasy, afterall). I always strive to make sure my info is truly accurate at definitive, but I'll be the first to say I don't know everything. lol
Yep, the Star Wars "obessive-compulsive-definitive-technical-accuracy-completist fanatic/nerd". I think that pretty much sums me up. While keeping it in perspective.
First, #34. I don't know what Endor you're fighting on, but I know that MY Endor already HAS an AT-ST.
That was a stupid mistake on my part and I corrected it. lol *quickly checks to see if he's being watched*
#32 is being talked about (the original problem was the lack of an animator), but several people, myself included, kinda like weapons needing to recharge from a Support/Officer character.
I kinda like your suggestion, but I don't know how you mean it to work.
I personally really like the idea of having to reload weapons with the proper animations and sequence and could be great if done correctly. It adds a small tactical element in the heat of battle. I know this isn't lore accurate considering most blasters use gas chambers AND battery packs, but I think I'd probably group the reload mechanic and sequence together for gameplay's sake. Of course, new battery packs and gas chambers would be dispensed from the support class. I'm not certain about the officer class having that ability.
#14 is probably out, because of gameplay limitations - we don't have a second countermeasures key to bind to CC rotation.
*GASP* NNNNOOOOOOOOO!!!!
#17 seems wierd, because I was certain that someone mentioned that the ceiling was 10m on the speeder thread... but people can already make them fly high above that level via glitches. I'd rather leave it as a ground-based vehicle, not an air vehicle.
Well, it's technically not a true flight craft, but it does have a pretty good flight ceiling (it really is about 25 meters/82feet), but that's not that high. It's a lightly armed and armored recon vehicle that has to rely on it's exceptional speed and maneuverability much like T.I.E. Fighters & Interceptors have to.
Luke, Leia and the Lance of Scout troopers demonstrated they can get kinda high in ROTJ, and I personally think it'd be great mechanic to incorporate in the game. I can picture myself skimming the roofs of the buildings on Mos Espa. lol
#1 is problematic because it's already damn hard to see out of the bloody cockpit. Most people tend to turn off cockpit views altogether, which makes all the work on the art kinda pointless. Let's not encourage that by making the default view worse.
I honestly don't believe it would make it worse and I haven't experienced any difficulty with the perspective so far. I don't know how deep into the cockpit you're thinking, but the pilot doesn't sit that deep in it. Plus, with the addition of the free-look function, there shouldn't be any problem.
#33 might be part of commander deployables, I can't remember... but simply having spontaneous orbital attacks sounds a little bit wierd. If the plot doesn't give you access to some sort of off-map support, then the game shouldn't either.
Spontaneous orbital strikes would be a no-no. That'd ruin it for everyone real quick. I'd personally like to be able to call in an orbital strike (laser or ion) or an air strike on enemy targets. I think it's a great tactical element for the game, but I'm not certain on how it should be implemented without any objects to counter by destroying. Unless maybe there was a limit on how many and when you can use them? Another problem is including them without a commander class. I don't know if it's tied to it or even if the commander class is something that really should be implemeted.
