DFD: 494 vs. 217, 935 vs. 555

[Nighthawk]

For fight one:
Controlling the specific firing direction sounds like something that could come in handy. An example I could think of could be for map-specific tech structures that can only fire in one direction. Only issue I see is whether the game's compass follows the isometric layout - it'd look a bit odd if it didn't.

As for the second issue. While I'm generally a fan of super weapon additions, I'm failing to see a lot of merits to this one, at least on InfantryTypes. As Beowulf says, the only real use of super weapons on infantry could be with Boris and an airstrike. In all other cases, InfantryTypes tend to die too easily and too quickly to be of much use as super weapon bases. That said, I can see a bit more use for super weapons on vehicles, especially if modders tend to go down the emerging "epic unit" road. However, I don't see it getting heavy use out of people if implemented.

Therefore, my stance is support #494, kill #217.


For fight two:
BurstDelay expansion sounds quite good to me. Modders could make, as the original poster mentions, structures akin to Generals' Patriot Missile Battery, which slowly fires a stream of missiles before pausing. It would give modders greater control over the behaviour of their structure's weaponry. As for infantry, well, I'm not sure what cases it would be used on there, but it couldn't go amiss to let InfantryTypes use it as well.

Edit: In fact, there might be a case for restoring its old FS functionality. In Firestorm, BurstDelay was a flag on WeaponTypes, not TechnoTypes. Might allow more customisation for things with more than one weapon.

As for the second issue, it's a nice idea in theory, but as Renegade was saying in the comments on that issue, the game's calculation of this would mean the implementation would be rather odd. You'd need to use abnormally low numbers to get any kind of noticeable effect. And anyway, doesn't the DelayKill logic cover this slightly?

As such, my stance is support #935, kill #555.