Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
DFD: 826 vs. 932, 979 vs. 1007
#7
Out of the first two, I support the second one because it would give what I see as necessary improvements to a feature. While I also would like the first one to survive, I'm not very attached to it.
Out of the second two, I would like the first one (MakeOwner= on weapons) to be implemented. I think that an option to change a targeted unit to a specified side, rather than only being able to temporarily (or even permanently) change a targeted unit to the firing unit's side, would be a good feature because it would enable side-changing without the reddish-purple perma-mind-control ring above the units affected, and enabling changing to a side other than just the attacker's would add a bit more variety. I also think that, as mentioned above, giving a player omniscience of another player just for infiltrating their battle lab would be way overpowered.
"The present is theirs. The future, for which I really worked, is mine."
- Nikola Tesla

"My - y - my - your - my vision has permutated. My - y - my - your - my plans have followed a path unpredicted by the union of Nod and GDI. Your - my - our - our directives must be reassessed." - Kane/CABAL

[Image: 9853.png]


Messages In This Thread
DFD: 826 vs. 932, 979 vs. 1007 - by Renegade - 07.07.2010, 19:24:06
RE: DFD: 826 vs. 932, 979 vs. 1007 - by MRMIdAS - 07.07.2010, 20:18:35
RE: DFD: 826 vs. 932, 979 vs. 1007 - by Beowulf - 07.07.2010, 20:56:06
RE: DFD: 826 vs. 932, 979 vs. 1007 - by Firefly - 07.07.2010, 23:13:52
RE: DFD: 826 vs. 932, 979 vs. 1007 - by Blade - 08.07.2010, 00:48:23
RE: DFD: 826 vs. 932, 979 vs. 1007 - by Professor_Tesla - 08.07.2010, 02:50:50
RE: DFD: 826 vs. 932, 979 vs. 1007 - by AlexB - 09.07.2010, 21:40:10
RE: DFD: 826 vs. 932, 979 vs. 1007 - by Renegade - 10.07.2010, 03:47:52
RE: DFD: 826 vs. 932, 979 vs. 1007 - by Renegade - 11.07.2010, 21:15:52



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)