AlexB
12.07.2010, 20:30:15
Fight 1
Deformable terrain should indeed offer more strategic possibilities, as long as it does lower the terrain only slightly and in a fair way (original TS artillery, anyone?). Westwoods "artillary" created craters right to the inner core... and it even did it while grinding performance. If this can be done right, this would be cool. Even though not only World War 2 TCs could gain from having a dragged artillery/turret, that would not be as much of a game changer.
Fight 2
I think Lt Albrecht's post sums it up just nicely. The proposed plane logic is just a bunch of micromanagement. It prevents the fast gameplay one expects from a C&C game. Fuel isn't the C&C way to balance units, it would just make them more complicated. Though non-VTOL planes should be done someday, this issue isn't the way to go. Stealth is a feature that might be useful for more modders and it could even fix the dog-sensors-submarine issue described. I'd rather not use numbers but names for the stealth types list instead, as adding entries can not wreak havoc, then. Otherwise, the proposal is quite decent.
Deformable terrain should indeed offer more strategic possibilities, as long as it does lower the terrain only slightly and in a fair way (original TS artillery, anyone?). Westwoods "artillary" created craters right to the inner core... and it even did it while grinding performance. If this can be done right, this would be cool. Even though not only World War 2 TCs could gain from having a dragged artillery/turret, that would not be as much of a game changer.
Fight 2
I think Lt Albrecht's post sums it up just nicely. The proposed plane logic is just a bunch of micromanagement. It prevents the fast gameplay one expects from a C&C game. Fuel isn't the C&C way to balance units, it would just make them more complicated. Though non-VTOL planes should be done someday, this issue isn't the way to go. Stealth is a feature that might be useful for more modders and it could even fix the dog-sensors-submarine issue described. I'd rather not use numbers but names for the stealth types list instead, as adding entries can not wreak havoc, then. Otherwise, the proposal is quite decent.