Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
DFD-R3: 504 vs. 650, 375 vs. 316
#2
Fight 1:
This is a no-brainer to me. #504 is the 2nd most popular participant of DFD, and there are several reasons why this is very useful and should be implemented, as I pointed out in Round 1.
On top of the reasons I mentioned there, here's another one: It can be used to combine several visual effects. For example, out of issue 523 which is already assigned but not scheduled yet, only Beam.AltPlane=y/n would be needed if 504 is implemented, as the rest can be emulated by giving the unit two weapons that behave identical except for the AltPlane. On top of that, 504 allows to combine effects that normally can't be combined, by giving it several weapons that all have the same FLH and ROF but use different sfx. This would allow to perfectly recreate the "solid laserbeam+heatwave" effect lasers had in TS, without the need to meddle with the drawing code.
You could also combine a small, normal laser with little damage, and a missile weapon with an FLH so high that missiles appear off-screen, so it looks as if the unit was using the laser to designate the target for artillery from orbit.

Well, and #650 is nothing more than a purely cosmetical thing, and a really small and minor one at that. With exactly 1 supporter on the community ranking right now.

Support #504
Kill #650




Fight 2:
This is the complete opposite of Fight 1, as both requests are about equally popular.
Personally, I think #316 is much more straightforward and useful, though. #375 may sound nice, but I HIGHLY doubt it would see even remotely as much use as Ammo= on weapons if it were implemented. #375 just has a bit of a gimmick-ish nature to it, it sounds fine on the surface but I don't think it's really useful. Ammo= otoh will become even more valuable now that "More than two weapons on a unit" is going to be implemented, because if Ammo is set on the vehicle it applies to all weapons.
Therefore,
Support #316
Kill #375


Messages In This Thread
DFD-R3: 504 vs. 650, 375 vs. 316 - by Renegade - 11.08.2010, 01:46:38
RE: DFD-R3: 504 vs. 650, 375 vs. 316 - by reaperrr - 11.08.2010, 02:31:14
RE: DFD-R3: 504 vs. 650, 375 vs. 316 - by MRMIdAS - 11.08.2010, 20:52:23
RE: DFD-R3: 504 vs. 650, 375 vs. 316 - by Beowulf - 11.08.2010, 23:33:56
RE: DFD-R3: 504 vs. 650, 375 vs. 316 - by Augusto - 14.08.2010, 13:59:35
RE: DFD-R3: 504 vs. 650, 375 vs. 316 - by AlexB - 02.10.2010, 23:07:59



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)