Posted: 30 Jul 2007, 20:26
just make it slightly cheaper, or make the build time slightly faster
Open Source Realtime Strategy Game Engine
https://springrts.com/phpbb/
1v0ry_k1ng wrote:imo the buzzsaw should be a complete game ender; crazily powered but easily destroyed
Im not using correctly? what the hell am i suppsoed to do? micro it? FPS? please, tell me. because that neurope game im referring to had my whole goddamn team going "wtf what a waste of metal" after that 5-10 mintues of firing into a Large Packed Base and doing hardly any damage. and give more than one example of it being used correctly, please. in a real game. because i can show you several real games where they sucked ass.Sleksa wrote:Dragon, you can forget high traj as it is not going to happen.
other buffing options are being looked into.
i've seen people use it correctly (as i mentioned, heze on delta)and for the record - i do not want to spend ten minutes and cuntloads of metal and energy into something solely for a "psychological effect".
just because you think it sucks is not enough reason to buff it the way you want to.
Dragon45 wrote:Nukes? yes of course. and its a good thing we dont have anything that would, say stop the nuke from being a total game ender. because then that would greatly reduce the effectiveness of a nuclear launcher as a game ender. it would hopefully cost less, build faster, and be more easily massable than a nuke.
i would, theoretically, call this an "anti nuke". hmmmmm.
Dragon45 wrote: and i just suggested high traj as a possible solution to its insane suckiness. as long as its not a total piece of shit, i dont care. which it is right now - a total. piece. of. shit. i wouldnt build it if it cost as much as two regular LRPCs right now.
Sleksa wrote:Dragon45 wrote:Nukes? yes of course. and its a good thing we dont have anything that would, say stop the nuke from being a total game ender. because then that would greatly reduce the effectiveness of a nuclear launcher as a game ender. it would hopefully cost less, build faster, and be more easily massable than a nuke.
i would, theoretically, call this an "anti nuke". hmmmmm.
The whole idea of a game-ending unit is retarded too, why do you need a single unit to end the game immediately?
you're a strange person. of course im not going to build it. why the hell would i? "breathe if you want to live, DM45! I am sleska raaaaaawr"Sleksa wrote:Dragon45 wrote: and i just suggested high traj as a possible solution to its insane suckiness. as long as its not a total piece of shit, i dont care. which it is right now - a total. piece. of. shit. i wouldnt build it if it cost as much as two regular LRPCs right now.
dont build it if you think its complete shit
Sleksa wrote:i think nukes are game-enders.
Dragon45 wrote:ill just wait
Sleska wrote:and i've already said that we're thinking of ways to buff it,
that, and we thrashed the idea of a high-traj vulcan.
you can cry as long as you want to, things arent going to change because you want them to.
WarC arent your personal devs
i agreed with some guy in this thread that the unit could indeed use a buff, then someone proposed high trajectory and i said the idea sucks hairy monkey balls like the guy who made the idea.you just agreed with my sentiments (vulcan/buzzsaw needs some sort of buff), then said i was crying about it, then when i say ill patiently wait *anyway* - you say im trying to force you to do things.