Air Support

Now, in the core concept Blackout/ADMIN wrote up, he mentioned the army making firebomb runs, burning groups of zombies and leaving the possibility that you could get burned with it. I like this idea, but why just firebombs? I mean, couldn't there be artillery strikes? Bombing runs? An AC-130 circling the city, just blowing the place to shit would be awesome, too.

Discuss.

Cool, there could be random air strikes by the army. But you needed to have a warning like one of those WW2 alarms... Otherwise the player would be like:

"Yupeee, I just made it through one of the hardest buildings in the game, let's save now... Oh wait what is that thing coming towards in the sky?...


O M G"

I though of this aswell. The problem with this is we'd have build brand new models to show that the buildings have been damaged instead of using the same base model that has burn marks on it

Simas wrote:Cool, there could be random air strikes by the army. But you needed to have a warning like one of those WW2 alarms... Otherwise the player would be like:

"Yupeee, I just made it through one of the hardest buildings in the game, let's save now... Oh wait what is that thing coming towards in the sky?...


O M G"

Problem with that is that there would be noone to sound the alarm, and as ADMIN said, the only warning you'll get is the plane's engines, and with nearly no background noise, it will be pretty easy to hear.

Also, you could just add big gaping holes in the buildings' models. We've only got one building model as of yet, so it's a low loss.

Problem with that is that there would be noone to sound the alarm, and as ADMIN said, the only warning you'll get is the plane's engines, and with nearly no background noise, it will be pretty easy to hear.

Also, you could just add big gaping holes in the buildings' models. We've only got one building model as of yet, so it's a low loss.

Yes, I know I fucked the quote up, but I'm on my iPod.

It really wouldn't be too much work, but thinking realistically, there's a reason they dropped firebombs in 28 Weeks later.

Firebombs guarantee death to anything that gets in contact with it. Explosives don't offer the same assurance (outside of nukes).

Oh, and you can call me Adam or Blackout. I don't much care for "Admin" and I didn't have a choice on that haha

Admin wrote:

Problem with that is that there would be noone to sound the alarm, and as ADMIN said, the only warning you'll get is the plane's engines, and with nearly no background noise, it will be pretty easy to hear.

Also, you could just add big gaping holes in the buildings' models. We've only got one building model as of yet, so it's a low loss.

Yes, I know I fucked the quote up, but I'm on my iPod.

It really wouldn't be too much work, but thinking realistically, there's a reason they dropped firebombs in 28 Weeks later.

Firebombs guarantee death to anything that gets in contact with it. Explosives don't offer the same assurance (outside of nukes).

Oh, and you can call me Adam or Blackout. I don't much care for "Admin" and I didn't have a choice on that haha

Well, tell me a 120mm Howitzer shell from an AC-130 wouldn't fuck some zombies up? Well, maybe the firebomb would come first, and then bombs, artillery, ect.

Invader wrote:

Admin wrote:

Problem with that is that there would be noone to sound the alarm, and as ADMIN said, the only warning you'll get is the plane's engines, and with nearly no background noise, it will be pretty easy to hear.

Also, you could just add big gaping holes in the buildings' models. We've only got one building model as of yet, so it's a low loss.

Yes, I know I fucked the quote up, but I'm on my iPod.

It really wouldn't be too much work, but thinking realistically, there's a reason they dropped firebombs in 28 Weeks later.

Firebombs guarantee death to anything that gets in contact with it. Explosives don't offer the same assurance (outside of nukes).

Oh, and you can call me Adam or Blackout. I don't much care for "Admin" and I didn't have a choice on that haha

Well, tell me a 120mm Howitzer shell from an AC-130 wouldn't fuck some zombies up? Well, maybe the firebomb would come first, and then bombs, artillery, ect.

It would, but there's still a risk that you wouldn't destroy the brain.

I think the other reason they use firebombs is because it's much cheaper than firing AC-130 rounds into the infected area

Admin wrote:

Invader wrote:

Admin wrote:

Problem with that is that there would be noone to sound the alarm, and as ADMIN said, the only warning you'll get is the plane's engines, and with nearly no background noise, it will be pretty easy to hear.

Also, you could just add big gaping holes in the buildings' models. We've only got one building model as of yet, so it's a low loss.

Yes, I know I fucked the quote up, but I'm on my iPod.

It really wouldn't be too much work, but thinking realistically, there's a reason they dropped firebombs in 28 Weeks later.

Firebombs guarantee death to anything that gets in contact with it. Explosives don't offer the same assurance (outside of nukes).

Oh, and you can call me Adam or Blackout. I don't much care for "Admin" and I didn't have a choice on that haha

Well, tell me a 120mm Howitzer shell from an AC-130 wouldn't fuck some zombies up? Well, maybe the firebomb would come first, and then bombs, artillery, ect.

It would, but there's still a risk that you wouldn't destroy the brain.

I think the other reason they use firebombs is because it's much cheaper than firing AC-130 rounds into the infected area

I guess so. Firebombs it is.

Invader wrote:

Admin wrote:

Invader wrote:

Admin wrote:

Problem with that is that there would be noone to sound the alarm, and as ADMIN said, the only warning you'll get is the plane's engines, and with nearly no background noise, it will be pretty easy to hear.

Also, you could just add big gaping holes in the buildings' models. We've only got one building model as of yet, so it's a low loss.

Yes, I know I fucked the quote up, but I'm on my iPod.

It really wouldn't be too much work, but thinking realistically, there's a reason they dropped firebombs in 28 Weeks later.

Firebombs guarantee death to anything that gets in contact with it. Explosives don't offer the same assurance (outside of nukes).

Oh, and you can call me Adam or Blackout. I don't much care for "Admin" and I didn't have a choice on that haha

Well, tell me a 120mm Howitzer shell from an AC-130 wouldn't fuck some zombies up? Well, maybe the firebomb would come first, and then bombs, artillery, ect.

It would, but there's still a risk that you wouldn't destroy the brain.

I think the other reason they use firebombs is because it's much cheaper than firing AC-130 rounds into the infected area

I guess so. Firebombs it is.

Hmm, one problem. Will the fire spread or will it be like those fire bottles at Red Dead Redemption?...

Hmm... I dunno. They probably should. Then again, that leaves the possibility that one firebomb run could destroy the whole city...

The firebomb runs in 28 weeks later, were closer to flash fires than a full on blaze so I think we should do that

Admin wrote:The firebomb runs in 28 weeks later, were closer to flash fires than a full on blaze so I think we should do that

Alright. How often should these runs happen, and how long should they take, from launch to the end of the flames?

Invader wrote:

Admin wrote:The firebomb runs in 28 weeks later, were closer to flash fires than a full on blaze so I think we should do that

Alright. How often should these runs happen, and how long should they take, from launch to the end of the flames?

Well, if we can make it randomized, they'll be completely random. We could probably randomize the amount of firebombs used also (making how long they last dependent on how much was used)

Admin wrote:

Invader wrote:

Admin wrote:The firebomb runs in 28 weeks later, were closer to flash fires than a full on blaze so I think we should do that

Alright. How often should these runs happen, and how long should they take, from launch to the end of the flames?

Well, if we can make it randomized, they'll be completely random. We could probably randomize the amount of firebombs used also (making how long they last dependent on how much was used)

I agree. But what's stopping the game from firebombing some desolate little field with no zombies in it 15 miles away from the city? (A.K.A. How will we keep it from firebombing pointless places?)

Invader wrote:

Admin wrote:

Invader wrote:

Admin wrote:The firebomb runs in 28 weeks later, were closer to flash fires than a full on blaze so I think we should do that

Alright. How often should these runs happen, and how long should they take, from launch to the end of the flames?

Well, if we can make it randomized, they'll be completely random. We could probably randomize the amount of firebombs used also (making how long they last dependent on how much was used)

I agree. But what's stopping the game from firebombing some desolate little field with no zombies in it 15 miles away from the city? (A.K.A. How will we keep it from firebombing pointless places?)

We could add factors into it like: Firebombs can be run on these streets: (list streets) or areas with X amount of infected

Admin wrote:

Invader wrote:

Admin wrote:

Invader wrote:

Admin wrote:The firebomb runs in 28 weeks later, were closer to flash fires than a full on blaze so I think we should do that

Alright. How often should these runs happen, and how long should they take, from launch to the end of the flames?

Well, if we can make it randomized, they'll be completely random. We could probably randomize the amount of firebombs used also (making how long they last dependent on how much was used)

I agree. But what's stopping the game from firebombing some desolate little field with no zombies in it 15 miles away from the city? (A.K.A. How will we keep it from firebombing pointless places?)

We could add factors into it like: Firebombs can be run on these streets: (list streets) or areas with X amount of infected

Good point.

The level of inactivity here really worries me...

Invader wrote:

Admin wrote:

Invader wrote:

Admin wrote:

Invader wrote:

Admin wrote:The firebomb runs in 28 weeks later, were closer to flash fires than a full on blaze so I think we should do that

Alright. How often should these runs happen, and how long should they take, from launch to the end of the flames?

Well, if we can make it randomized, they'll be completely random. We could probably randomize the amount of firebombs used also (making how long they last dependent on how much was used)

I agree. But what's stopping the game from firebombing some desolate little field with no zombies in it 15 miles away from the city? (A.K.A. How will we keep it from firebombing pointless places?)

We could add factors into it like: Firebombs can be run on these streets: (list streets) or areas with X amount of infected

Good point.

The level of inactivity here really worries me...

Yes, it does...

Zzzzzzzzzz...