Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
DFD: 426 vs. 510, 323 vs. 993
#9
Fight 1
Upgradable super weapons are not a bad idea but I think the Battleships would look so much better in-game. There are indeed many SWs that could be upgraded: more paratroopers, faster recharge time, more damage or larger range... There are also some units that could benefit from two or more turrets: Battleships, epic units,... ok, I'm out of ideas.

Nonetheless, that crazy cruisers in RA1 were just cool. They looked as powerful as they were. Multiple-voxel turrets.

Fight 2
More realistic nuclear explosions for a game with a comic bomb. Even for small bombs (and superweapons aren't) the explosion would vaporise everything even a dozen miles away. Projected from infantry sizes, everything on the map would just wither in immense heat and bright light, that, as the name already reveals, travels at the speed of light. More realistic indeed.

Mobile EMPs are cool. I like the visual change when loaded, thus NoAmmoAlt=.


Messages In This Thread
DFD: 426 vs. 510, 323 vs. 993 - by Renegade - 22.07.2010, 19:55:57
RE: DFD: 426 vs. 510, 323 vs. 993 - by reaperrr - 23.07.2010, 00:43:58
RE: DFD: 426 vs. 510, 323 vs. 993 - by Beowulf - 23.07.2010, 00:44:22
RE: DFD: 426 vs. 510, 323 vs. 993 - by Blade - 23.07.2010, 10:31:17
RE: DFD: 426 vs. 510, 323 vs. 993 - by MRMIdAS - 23.07.2010, 22:10:08
RE: DFD: 426 vs. 510, 323 vs. 993 - by Renegade - 28.07.2010, 23:21:42
RE: DFD: 426 vs. 510, 323 vs. 993 - by Renegade - 06.08.2010, 03:45:47
RE: DFD: 426 vs. 510, 323 vs. 993 - by AlexB - 06.08.2010, 05:49:18
RE: DFD: 426 vs. 510, 323 vs. 993 - by Renegade - 06.08.2010, 06:53:40



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)