Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
DFD: 681 vs. 757, 358 vs. 526
#10
Quote:Kill #757, support #681. I don't care about climbing, but jumping would be perfect for BattleMechs with Jumpjets
So you'd sacrifice:
-Deploy to change (attribute)
-RA3 japan style deploy to transform from air/ground
-Emulation of many 'special abilities' from other games
For:
-Battlemechs that can Jump?

Somehow I don't think that's the right way round. Consider how many modders would use each feature, I can see a MUCH larger usage for #757 than #681...
Quote:I believe you misunderstood Blade, what he meant was probably that people want units that occupy more than 1x1 cell only because that would reduce overlapping.
Oh well, their choice as to how to use it... It may be a bastard to code but at this point that's D/Ren/AlexB's call. I just think people would get more mileage out of it than ths kinda weird phasing idea which has exactly one usage.


Messages In This Thread
DFD: 681 vs. 757, 358 vs. 526 - by Renegade - 05.07.2010, 21:21:50
RE: DFD: 681 vs. 757, 358 vs. 526 - by MRMIdAS - 05.07.2010, 23:24:41
RE: DFD: 681 vs. 757, 358 vs. 526 - by cranium - 06.07.2010, 01:10:29
RE: DFD: 681 vs. 757, 358 vs. 526 - by jimmy3421 - 06.07.2010, 05:13:03
RE: DFD: 681 vs. 757, 358 vs. 526 - by Beowulf - 06.07.2010, 05:32:55
RE: DFD: 681 vs. 757, 358 vs. 526 - by Blade - 06.07.2010, 10:45:25
RE: DFD: 681 vs. 757, 358 vs. 526 - by reaperrr - 06.07.2010, 19:19:09
RE: DFD: 681 vs. 757, 358 vs. 526 - by Lt Albrecht - 06.07.2010, 22:47:16
RE: DFD: 681 vs. 757, 358 vs. 526 - by reaperrr - 07.07.2010, 00:57:38
RE: DFD: 681 vs. 757, 358 vs. 526 - by AlexB - 07.07.2010, 19:34:21
RE: DFD: 681 vs. 757, 358 vs. 526 - by Renegade - 07.07.2010, 20:21:51
RE: DFD: 681 vs. 757, 358 vs. 526 - by DCoder - 08.07.2010, 18:37:12
RE: DFD: 681 vs. 757, 358 vs. 526 - by Renegade - 08.07.2010, 19:15:00



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)