firewill0 / FIR_AWS_SystemDevelopment

FIR_AWS Development
5 stars 0 forks source link

Make AMS accessible to the co-pilot/weapons officer only for all two seater variants #55

Open Armybarmy101 opened 1 year ago

Armybarmy101 commented 1 year ago

Hello!

Firstly, thanks so much for all your hard work in making these mods. It is very much appreciated. I have an idea, and while I saw you replied directly to my post on the forum, I thought I would present it here as an idea.

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

In a way yes. There is a problem in all two seater jets when playing cooperatively with a friend. As weapons officer - I should be in charge of choosing the Jets loadout. But the pilot has main control over AMS and this is not only unrealistic, it stifles roleplay and removes the ability for the weapons officer/co-pilot to have a proper role within this two seater dynamic.

Describe the solution you'd like

I propose making AMS accessible to the co-pilot/weapons officer only for all two seater variants. This way, anyone who wants to fly solo will use the one seater variant so no one will miss out. Two seater jets are designed to be flow by two people after all so no-one can complain about the AMS only being available to the second player of a two seater only in this case.

Describe alternatives you've considered

An alternative to this is that the pilot has another option to slave the AMS system use over to co-pilot/weapons officer.

Thanks for reading and considering my proposal.

Cheers.

firewill0 commented 1 year ago

Hello, Well I think you already read my reply in the forum, but I want to say I was also considered same thing like your suggestion, but some limitations and bugs make nothing advance.

However, not 100% same feature, but I'm planning to design some feature like "only ground crew or similar designated role can manage & operate AMS" for roleplay thing. It may make some people can play as ground crew, and operate AMS, similar real life.

Armybarmy101 commented 1 year ago

Hi thanks for reply. I understand. Your alternative idea sounds great. Thanks again. :)