DFD: 360 vs. 655, 945 vs. 603

[Renegade]

DFD: Daily Feature Deathmatch

---

The Cruel Fight For Implementation

This is a Daily Feature Deathmatch post. If you are unfamiliar with the background of this event, please read the announcement, the adjustment and the schedule.

Fight 1

---

[0000360] Make the bullet Efect vs. [0000655] Animation Damage Radius Feature

Fight 2

---

[0000945] Localized Power Provision Support vs. [0000603] Turrets and IFV logic on buildings

After the fight is over, two of these issues will be suspended, while the other two move on to the next round.
Remember that the coders will not take part in the discussion, so make your arguments complete, concise and convincing - when it's over, it's over.

Part of that is clearly marking what outcome you support for which issue.
There should be no ambiguity in the issue you're talking about, and it should be clear what outcome you support. Feel free to put your stance in bold, and use simple terminology like "kill #69" or "I want #42 to survive".
This use of simple terminology should be part of a larger argumentation - if this is all your post consists of, it will be ignored. We are interested in argumentations and details to consider, not votes.

A decision will be made either way, a lack of discussion will not cause all issues to live.

Be friendly, be civil, be logical.
You are allowed to try to deconstruct the arguments of those arguing against your candidate, but remember that they don't make the call - there is really no point in getting personal.

The discussion should be contained in this thread, argumentations elsewhere will be ignored, but you are allowed to transfer and adapt points made elsewhere in the past.

We want a good, clean fight.
Let's get it on!

These fights are largely automatically generated - if an issue turns out to be unfit for combat, it will be disqualified and the opponent will go into the queue.

[Beowulf]

Kill #655. Easily emulated if it doesn't work, but #360 is just a delicious eye-candy request. Bullet tracers are just awesome and I love them. Definitely needs colorization for more visual fun.

Kill #945. The usefulness is surpassed exponentially by #603. Sorry to say, but #603 is a thousand times more useful and I would love to see it implemented. It could potentially unlock a new way of working with defenses. Might be some issues if its mixed with IFVMode, but could be worked around with a different tag for building sets. Not sure how people feel about that though...

[MRMIdAS]

[0000360] can be emulated, but does have it's own set of problems, however compared to the other request, this seems the better feature.

[0000603] IFV style logic on buildings would be great, great to emulate the multigunner turret from RA3, and would also go well with proposed IFV logic expansion.

[Orac]

[0000360] can be emulated with a voxel projectile, and doesn't seem to me to be a really useful thing in any case, if I'm reading the request correctly.
As for [0000655], this one is also easily emulated making it unnecessary as well, so I really can't vote on two fairly drab issues.

With the second fight, I can make arguments either way, but [0000603] is the one I like much more.
[0000945] would complicate play in ways which really cannot be allowed to be complicated, spending my time zoning powerplants for specific structures is the sort of thing I see myself doing in SimCity, but not in C&C.

So I vote [0000603].

[Lt Albrecht]

Orac, we've both seen the approximation of #360 and we both know it has a few quirks that could do with fixing. Out of the two, one which is moot and the other slightly maybe kinda a little bit useful, shouldn''t we go for the one that would actually do something?

As for the second issue, I'm with everyone else, zoning powerplants (as orac put it) is annoying in a C&C game, whereas 603 is awesome.

[Renegade]

Administrative Notice:

Given that there have been no new posts in the past three days, it is assumed this discussion is finished; we will proceed to consider the arguments.

[Renegade]

Fight 1

---

I concur with Beowulf. Tracers are indeed awesome.

Kill: #655
Support: #360


Fight 2

---

I like the idea of zoned power supply, if only because it makes the separation into multiple bases more effective, and allows one base to hold even if the other one's power supply goes down, rather than being dragged into destruction despite having a shitload of power plants right there, but I agree with you all that, of the two in comparison, #603 will likely be of more use to modders.

A pity, alas, even good requests have to die.

Kill: #945
Support: #603

[AlexB]

Fight 1
Tracers are awesome. Make the bullet effect.

Fight 2
I can't imagine how the power should be localised. If one base has no power but another one does, should the power bar be red or green? Should factories produce stuff more slowly if there are two, one in each base? Should it check for primary? Should a spy merely shut down one base part? Should the power output/drain texts on selected power plants display per-base? If you still got a building somewhere on the map with no power plants next to it, how many times should EVA tell you about the "low power" situation? Would this be intuitive for a gamer? Every game frame there would be heavy calculations needed to find out whether a building has power that might slow down the game.

The IFV logic for buildings has use cases like the RA3 Allied defense and it seems more modders want that.

[Renegade]

Result:

As above.