Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
DFD-R3: 404 vs. 525, 1069 vs. 526
#11
Fight 1

I acknowledge the reason and need behind #404, but I just can't bring myself to voting for it.
As usual, the argumentation it can be done on maps is bullcrap (you are suggesting modders change every single map in existence for every single deploying unit in their mods? Riiiight.), but overall, the request just feels so...meh.

Others have already given a number of usage cases for multiple types of stealth, and personally, I was thinking about RA-like camo bunkers.
Or mines, for that matter. Give mines their own stealth type, require a mine seeker to uncover them.
Multiple stealth types open up a variety of hide/seek combinations, and if Ambush Mode survives, they'll be even more interesting.

They just sound more fun than yet another "let the AI do X" request.

Kill: #404
Support: #525

Fight 2

I can't be bothered to figure out a way to say this nicely, so I'll say it how it is: I don't give a shit that SuperAnimFour can't have sound.
Seriously. As Nighthawk pointed out, there will be enough other things one can attach sound to.

Phased units, on the other hand, could be interesting, even more so if you have entire phased bases.

Kill: #1069
Support: #526
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: 404 vs. 525, 1069 vs. 526 - by Renegade - 11.08.2010, 01:34:38
RE: DFD-R3: 404 vs. 525, 1069 vs. 526 - by Blade - 11.08.2010, 14:41:49
RE: DFD-R3: 404 vs. 525, 1069 vs. 526 - by Renegade - 18.08.2010, 08:02:47
RE: DFD-R3: 404 vs. 525, 1069 vs. 526 - by AlexB - 01.09.2010, 11:53:42
RE: DFD-R3: 404 vs. 525, 1069 vs. 526 - by DCoder - 03.10.2010, 20:37:13



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)