Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602
#10
Well, I understand the logic reaperr, but having a bullet spread a LESSER distance because it's firing at a bigger target is also unrealistic (but so is this game, so whatever). Since all tanks/ships only logically occupy the very center lepton of their cell for CellSpread calculation (as opposed to the entire cell) I can see why this might be wanted. However finding some way to implement this would be insane. Finding a way to have the game access the properties of a different technotype and have a specific property of that technotype change the way a fired projectile (from a different technotype) behaves sounds like dreamwork to me, there just seems to be no realistic way that this possibly could be implemented. I'm not sure if there is even a possible way for the game to determine exactly what object (technotype) is being targeted by a weapon/unit.

Besides, I never liked the inaccuracy system, it was far too much of a hassle because of having to mix CellSpread into the logic which always complicates things (particularly when buildings are involved). If you use the already requested Random Damage and then tweak versus accordingly you will get a nearly identical logic to this, minus needing to use CellSpread and the ability to randomly hit other targets than the intended one.

As for forcing DestroyAnims, this seems interesting and I might end up using it one day, but it's not a deal breaker and certainly not important. I'd almost like to say kill both.

But since that won't happen I might as well support the somewhat more useful feature, and that is #392.


For fight 2, I have to agree with most everyone else here, cloak towers really won't be widely used until we can find some way to fix the lag that comes from making SHPs transparent.

And I would probably use TurretCompressFrames etc. on every single tank I have that uses barrels, if this was implemented for tanks. This would be a really awesome logic, I really like the idea!

That said, I support issue #602


Messages In This Thread
DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by AlexB - 17.07.2010, 19:04:28
RE: DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by MRMIdAS - 17.07.2010, 22:01:23
RE: DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by reaperrr - 17.07.2010, 22:25:51
RE: DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by Beowulf - 17.07.2010, 23:39:13
RE: DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by Darkstorm - 18.07.2010, 00:47:03
RE: DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by reaperrr - 18.07.2010, 02:57:04
RE: DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by WoRmINaToR - 18.07.2010, 22:34:56
RE: DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by reaperrr - 18.07.2010, 23:47:42
RE: DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by WoRmINaToR - 19.07.2010, 17:23:49
RE: DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by WoRmINaToR - 19.07.2010, 18:46:24
RE: DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by WoRmINaToR - 19.07.2010, 20:00:40
RE: DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by AlexB - 22.07.2010, 06:43:53
RE: DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by DCoder - 22.07.2010, 11:02:25
RE: DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by Renegade - 22.07.2010, 22:41:45
RE: DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by DCoder - 26.07.2010, 20:34:31
RE: DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by Renegade - 27.07.2010, 02:38:06



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)