Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
DFD-R3: 461 vs. 924, 943 vs. 612
#10
Fight 1

My primary interest in #924 was CellSpread Temporal-ness, for the awesome "oh shit" effect when something drops or deploys in the middle of your base and erases a big hole into it.
Nothing quite like seeing half your base vanish into thin air.
Given the demand of working CellSpread for Temporal, I have no doubt that particular part will inevitably be coded one day, so my personal interest in the feature ends there.

What does it offer beyond that?
  • Temporal eradication without an active shooter
  • Timed temporal eradication
  • Some random thing with a cap that I don't understand because the submitter moronically submitted his request in some badly formatted, illegible pseudo-code without comments or sense.

The main issue I have with this is: What is the goddamn point?
If I don't need a unit to continue the temporal eradication, then the target is basically fucked the second I hit.
The only difference is when the target stops occupying the space.
It's a one-shot-kills weapon, and the only difference to a Chrono Monkey with Nuke Bananas is that the building keeps occupying space for Temporal.Duration frames, rather than just exploding and going away.

Unless, of course, one were to actually code it like EMP, meaning the temporal phaseness would stop after the duration, returning the building to life.
That would be kinda neat, but would also not be too different from EMP, and actually lack any kind of advantage over it - I mean, seriously: If I temporarily chrono the enemy's units, what's the situation? His units are invulnerable, I can't destroy them, but in this scenario, they also won't vanish. All I'm doing is delaying his usage of them, maybe giving me time to summon reinforcements. A slight tactical advantage, but EMP would be more helpful.

All in all, CellSpread temporal effects were the best part of that request, and the rest is just a simple way to turn temporal into super weapons and a neat graphical effect.

None of it equals the vast tactical improvements gained from being able to tell your units to hold fire.
That request certainly isn't without problems, much like the other "switching modes" request, but even a simple and GUI-lacking implementation would already open up a whole lot of new options for players.

Kill: #924
Support: #461

Fight 2

I have already explained, in detail, that there is nothing "gimmicky" about land on water, and eva's concern could be addressed by making the buildable land destroyable.
Overall, I think you either didn't read my previous judgement, or you're still lacking creativity.
Given that Speeder still supports buildings on water, despite me having explained, in detail, how worthless buildings on water are without something for factory production to stand on, I'm guessing the former.

Either way, I'm voting for AI Enhancements, but not because any of you was particularly convincing in arguing against land on water, but because the AI in YR is dramatically lacking in the "I" part, and that's a more pressing issue.

Kill: #943
Support: #612
Forum Rules

(01.06.2011, 05:43:25)kenosis Wrote: Oh damn don't be disgraced again!

(25.06.2011, 20:42:59)Nighthawk Wrote: The proverbial bearded omni-bug may be dead, but the containment campaign is still being waged in the desert.


Messages In This Thread
DFD-R3: 461 vs. 924, 943 vs. 612 - by Renegade - 11.08.2010, 01:39:06
RE: DFD-R3: 461 vs. 924, 943 vs. 612 - by mt. - 11.08.2010, 03:58:51
RE: DFD-R3: 461 vs. 924, 943 vs. 612 - by eva-251 - 11.08.2010, 09:01:07
RE: DFD-R3: 461 vs. 924, 943 vs. 612 - by Blade - 11.08.2010, 13:02:28
RE: DFD-R3: 461 vs. 924, 943 vs. 612 - by Speeder - 11.08.2010, 19:23:49
RE: DFD-R3: 461 vs. 924, 943 vs. 612 - by MRMIdAS - 11.08.2010, 20:09:15
RE: DFD-R3: 461 vs. 924, 943 vs. 612 - by Beowulf - 11.08.2010, 22:10:22
RE: DFD-R3: 461 vs. 924, 943 vs. 612 - by Renegade - 18.08.2010, 07:29:50
RE: DFD-R3: 461 vs. 924, 943 vs. 612 - by DCoder - 18.08.2010, 18:21:44



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)