Paradrops or levelbombing?
#4
Posted 12 April 2005 - 09:26 PM
#5
Posted 12 April 2005 - 10:15 PM
If you do make paradrops as well, then make it so that theres more then 8 or 10 troops, how about a whole swarm of them like in a real war, but make the countdown a little longer obviously.
#6
Posted 13 April 2005 - 12:55 AM
It would be sad to see paradrops go. It's really kinda hard to imagine WWII without paratroops.
Player-made drops are utterly useless, pointless, and terrible, so if that's the only other option I'll pretend it doesn't exist... Let us never speak of that again.
Player-made bombing runs, on the other hand, are crucial to any game...
Since the player will be able to build aicraft anyway, the advantage from a bombing superweapon is minimized, no matter how powerful it is.
#7
Posted 13 April 2005 - 11:20 AM
& your point is..? I don’t see it as a problem, I see it more of a bonus. After all heavy bombers were notoriously inaccurate.you can't actually drop a bomb on TOP of something, only next to it
Their not useless, just very buggy & require a lot of micro. ATM I have removed the transport planes but if I can get them to work better I’ll re-add them later.Player-made drops are utterly useless, pointless, and terrible, so if that's the only other option I'll pretend it doesn't exist... Let us never speak of that again.
#12
Posted 13 April 2005 - 05:51 PM
Sometimes AI drops the parabombs from random mods away from enemy base
personally i've never seen that, it tends to paradrop in an area with weakest AA defence building concerntrations.
Edited by Allied General, 13 April 2005 - 05:52 PM.
#14
Posted 13 April 2005 - 06:21 PM
Sometimes AI drops the parabombs from random mods away from enemy base
I have seen them do that before but only once in mission I made...
Edited by Mig Eater, 13 April 2005 - 06:22 PM.
#15
Posted 13 April 2005 - 10:01 PM
& your point is..? I don’t see it as a problem, I see it more of a bonus. After all heavy bombers were notoriously inaccurate.
You're kidding, right? There's a difference between being an innacurate bomber, and intentionally not bombing targets (like this bomber would)
The problem is that you can protect crucial buildings (or heck, your whole base) by putting fodder units around it. Or just build your whole base tightly packed and you can't be touched by em. The bomber then just goes around in circles for ten minutes. The same applies to large packs of units.
You could increase the radius it is allowed to drop in, or give it a massive cell spread, but these are more damage control than solutions.
Not being able to drop a bomb physically on top of a building isn't a bonus. It's a limitation on the game engine.
#16
Posted 14 April 2005 - 05:12 AM
See this for more Info: http://forums.renega...topic=16&st=420
\\//,DedmanWalkin
#17
Posted 14 April 2005 - 05:50 AM
EAApoc wrote:
The only written law in a C&C game I ever saw is please Mr.Developer make it fun and give me a lot of **** to explode, o and don't you ever get another soul to play Kane but Joe Kucan. Aside from those two rules, all bets are off =) hehe
-APOC
#18
Posted 14 April 2005 - 08:42 AM
1) Bombs that fall to the ground slowly & have parachutes!
2) Infantry that fall to the ground fast with no parachutes!!!
Frankly both of them suck, so it’s one or the other!
I’m planing to use Pad’s patch, as I need 7 (one per side) fully customised paradrops for this.
#19
Posted 15 April 2005 - 08:57 AM
i wouldnt mind both but level bombing is something different to paras. so id go with bombing
Paradox @ Ali - "And what the fuck would you know? Ever been? Oh no, sorry, your map says 'HERE BE DRAGONS' anywhere outside of your rock"
#20
Posted 15 April 2005 - 09:33 PM
"I'm not retreating, I'm just fighting in another direction" (anonymous US corporal, Korea)
work is sacred...so don't go near it.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users