Commbombing - Page 3

Commbombing

Classic game design, maintained to please you...

Moderator: Content Developer

YokoZar
Posts: 883
Joined: 15 Jul 2007, 22:02

Re: Commbombing

Post by YokoZar »

TheFatController wrote:
NOiZE wrote:perhaps comwrecks, shouldn't be able to be rezzed... or maybe rezzed to a decoy commander instead. Its also kinda logic, as the real "commander" died.
This would be a cool mod option, noted for next release :o
Make sure they res quicker if you do ;)
User avatar
[TS]Lollocide
Posts: 324
Joined: 30 Nov 2007, 18:24

Re: Commbombing

Post by [TS]Lollocide »

No don't pull that shit. Just increase the E cost of rezzing a commander. Or the time it takes. But replacing it with gay non-dgun capable unit makes ressing it pointless.
User avatar
MR.D
Posts: 1527
Joined: 06 Aug 2005, 13:15

Re: Commbombing

Post by MR.D »

Removing the ability to transport a commander from the T1 transports would definitely be the smart way to do it.

Leave it for the T2 Air transports, this would definately reduce the ammount of lame com bombing and base dgun rape early game.

It will also reduce the chance that a teamate Greifer will steal your commander and use it as a cheap early nuke when you're not looking.
User avatar
Wombat
Posts: 3379
Joined: 15 Dec 2008, 15:53

Re: Commbombing

Post by Wombat »

+1 fpr mr.d - also , lets say on dsd, taking middle hill will be more difficult and need more time

also no com in t1 trans will make ppl sop starting air and idling for 10 min
User avatar
Jazcash
Posts: 5309
Joined: 08 Dec 2007, 17:39

Re: Commbombing

Post by Jazcash »

Wombat wrote:+1 fpr mr.d - also , lets say on dsd, taking middle hill will be more difficult and need more time

also no com in t1 trans will make ppl sop starting air and idling for 10 min
WHAT!? FUCK YOU! If I had suggested this you'd just jizz in my face you bastards!
User avatar
1v0ry_k1ng
Posts: 4656
Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 10:24

Re: Commbombing

Post by 1v0ry_k1ng »

best way is to fiddle with the edgeeffect of the explosion so it only does enough damage to kill another com on full health when within like 300 range (dgun plus max distance coms can move apart while dgun travels)

this way, when one com dguns another both go boom

but if one com explodes near another com on max health, unless it is very close the other com survives. this would make atlas combombing less effective.
User avatar
Wombat
Posts: 3379
Joined: 15 Dec 2008, 15:53

Re: Commbombing

Post by Wombat »

its not result of hate but logic improvement of gameplay

and ye nobody like u
User avatar
[TS]Lollocide
Posts: 324
Joined: 30 Nov 2007, 18:24

Re: Commbombing

Post by [TS]Lollocide »

This is a joke, without commbombing porc use in early/late games will increase dramatically, as will the time it takes to break down the porc, leading to gay, overly long games of attrition.

And this comes from someone who lovs teh porc. (Especially when someone cbombs and I get 2.5k metal because they're stupid).
Gertkane
Posts: 156
Joined: 18 Mar 2006, 16:10

Re: Commbombing

Post by Gertkane »

Not really, i suggest you spec games and do a statistic about early porc. The amount of combombing used isnt really major, it happens but its not as often as you would like to make it out to be.

Now flashing/gatoring coms inside porcs, thats what usually destroys porc.
User avatar
[TS]Lollocide
Posts: 324
Joined: 30 Nov 2007, 18:24

Re: Commbombing

Post by [TS]Lollocide »

Gertkane wrote:Not really, i suggest you spec games and do a statistic about early porc. The amount of combombing used isnt really major, it happens but its not as often as you would like to make it out to be.

Now flashing/gatoring coms inside porcs, thats what usually destroys porc.
Yeah, but if you're stupid enough to leave your comm inside your porc...well that's a self-evident statement.
Post Reply

Return to “Balanced Annihilation”