DFD-R4: 525 vs. 1047, 526 vs. 1121

[Renegade]

DFD: Daily Feature Deathmatch

---

The Cruel Fight For Implementation

This is a Daily Feature Deathmatch post. If you are unfamiliar with the background of this event, please read the announcement, the adjustment and the schedule.

Fight 1

---

[525] Allow different types of stealth vs. [1047] Fix Gatling Logic

Fight 2

---

[526] Allow units to become "phased" vs. [1121] Parachuted=yes

After the fight is over, two of these issues will be suspended, while the other two move on to the next round.
Remember that the coders will not take part in the discussion, so make your arguments complete, concise and convincing - when it's over, it's over.

Part of that is clearly marking what outcome you support for which issue.
There should be no ambiguity in the issue you're talking about, and it should be clear what outcome you support. Feel free to put your stance in bold, and use simple terminology like "kill #69" or "I want #42 to survive".
This use of simple terminology should be part of a larger argumentation - if this is all your post consists of, it will be ignored. We are interested in argumentations and details to consider, not votes.

A decision will be made either way, a lack of discussion will not cause all issues to live.

Be friendly, be civil, be logical.
You are allowed to try to deconstruct the arguments of those arguing against your candidate, but remember that they don't make the call - there is really no point in getting personal.

The discussion should be contained in this thread, argumentations elsewhere will be ignored, but you are allowed to transfer and adapt points made elsewhere in the past.

We want a good, clean fight.
Let's get it on!

These fights are largely automatically generated - if an issue turns out to be unfit for combat, it will be disqualified and the opponent will go into the queue.

[MRMIdAS]

support
[525] upgrading stealth would open more doors for creative modders.
I don't care either way about fight 2.

[Orac]

Fight one is very difficult for me... On the one hand, Gattling does need a fix. On the other hand, new types of stealth open a variety of new doors to modders which would ordinarily be closed (Destroyers hunting subs while Sensor Arrays hunt Stealth Tanks, most obviously).
But, because Gattling already sort of works in YR, I'm going to vote for new stealth types.
Support [525]

Fight two, I really don't give a damn. Allowing units to become phased will probably be used, as will parachuted=yes, but neither deliver something massively important imo.
As such I'd rather vote support of both of fight one's features.

[reaperrr]

Fight one is very difficult for me... On the one hand, Gattling does need a fix. On the other hand, new types of stealth open a variety of new doors to modders which would ordinarily be closed (Destroyers hunting subs while Sensor Arrays hunt Stealth Tanks, most obviously).
But, because Gattling already sort of works in YR, I'm going to vote for new stealth types.
Support [525]

Agreed.

Fight 2:
Support [1121]

[RandomNutjob]

Ok 1st one was easy as it is quite important [in my eyes] to separate subs from stealth units so I back 525

As for the phase stuff, call me dumb but I just don't get it - combining that with the fact I'd love to see Parabombs and any other parachuted bomb [or whatever else a modder can think up] I fully support 1121

[Blade]

525 for stealth, needed to allow subs and land stealth units to have different sounds and being able to split the detection would be nice also.

[Speeder]

Support #525. Different stealth types are much more neccessary IMO.

[Beowulf]

Support #525. The practical application has some serious potential.

Support #1121. Be nice to have proper parachuting projectiles. No more dodgy hacks. wooooooo!

[Black Shadow 750]

Support 525, different types of stealth are needed and gattling weapons can always just use a dummy AA weapon (that and the "request" should've been a bugfix).

[reaperrr]

I just noticed that #1121, according to comments by DCoder and cranium, has already been implemented. I still think #526 is a kinda meh issue and should die or be of VERY low priority when the re-scheduling takes place, but since its opponent is already implemented...

[RandomNutjob]

As reaperrr says 1121 is already in so does that mean 526 gets a bye or is it judged on comments here and on the issue itself?

[Tempest]

Support #525. The practical application has some serious potential.

Support #1121. Be nice to have proper parachuting projectiles. No more dodgy hacks. wooooooo!

Exactly..
525 and 1121

[Renegade]

It would be a question of effort involved, similar to KillDriver. If you all voted to kill #1121, then we certainly wouldn't remove what's there, but we would accept your wish not to waste time on it, and give bugs or other issues with it very low priority, if any at all.

Whether we would turn around and implement #526 on the other side depends on how big the support for it is. In past DFDs, it seemed like it didn't have as much general support as other issues have.

[reaperrr]

Ok, in that case I'll continue to support 1121.

[Renegade]

Administrative Notice:

Since the last post in this thread is almost four days old, we will assume the debate is over and proceed to judging.