Request for Information

[ADMIRAL MANSON]

Maybe. I havent heard any complaints about it though. It's just a different game dynamic. I'm not going to whine about how the new one is worse and such. I don't really have any feelings about it one way or the other.

Until you lose the game because it cancelled your blast tanks

Really I don't know what they were thinking the old way. Of course I would want to commit the scrap right away, otherwise There is the chance I wouldn't have the scrap when I needed it.

Well yeah, true. But it's also something that you can use against the enemy. Logically it might sound stupid to have scrap committed upon the build but to lose it all just because your rec suddenly lost the requisite storage capacity to build the thing, but it actually works out fine in a way. It's just another nuance of attack and defense. It works fine because it's far to easy to get to tech, normally since it only requires 2 pools -- but with the ability to cancel the tech you have the ability to delay the enemy's blast tanks from hitting the field at which point it becomes a blast war (which isnt as fun as scout vs scout). It also forces you as a team to protect the 2nd pool while the tech is going up and the enemy to scramble to take the pool down.

Yeah I think it was changed for realism but would need KEN or GSH to confirm that with the committed scrap for building things. I agree also with the scout vs tank war difference for fun since it keeps originality from 1.0 or and 1.1 days.

[ADMIRAL MANSON]

I'm more of a fan of thinking the constructor has a buffer of unlimited size. It processes scrap into building material on demand.

Well, this is burger king, so you can have it your way and I can have it mine.

It wasn't for this case since I goggled that slogan.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index ... 759AAAlxNm

[ADMIRAL MANSON]

Indeed.

A similar dynamic to 1.2 could be added in via a rec variant that makes the tech cost 85 scrap. Since you wouldnt be able to cancel it by getting the enemy down to 1 pool during build, instead you could prevent it from being built in the first place by preventing him from getting 3 pools and 85 scrap.

By what means are you saying in different viewpoints? "Since you wouldnt be able to cancel it by getting the enemy down to 1 pool during build"

[ADMIRAL MANSON]

Indeed.

A similar dynamic to 1.2 could be added in via a rec variant that makes the tech cost 85 scrap. Since you wouldnt be able to cancel it by getting the enemy down to 1 pool during build, instead you could prevent it from being built in the first place by preventing him from getting 3 pools and 85 scrap.

Ouch, overkill.

I like my games to get big enough to need blast assault tank or walker, some sort of endall. Scion? Kinda harder since they don't have one "I eat you for breakfast unit" as the mauler and titan are kind of different parts of the same whole.

I think the map is called cubes for dm or something like that where the vehicles on top of little cliffs like squares and the rckt tank and the mauler are in the middle of the map. That is a very fun map and espically when you get pl-stab or blast on the mauler.

Maybe it is slightly overkill to make the tech cost 85. As it would be easier to just never touch the enemy's secondary and just keep preventing him from planting a 3rd.

I'm a little bit from the old school where you need good solid attacking and defense roles for the players. It truly is beautiful to see 4 human players working in independent roles to cover each other, such as one player (usually the ace) drawing aggro while the other ones attack. Its a little harder in 1.3 to draw aggro and escape unscathed as it is notably easier to chase down a retreating opponent, so you can't run into the middle of a formation to disrupt its unity and then still successfully escape.

Assault units, in 1.2 at least have always been 'tie breakers' and never really a primary assault force, such as having a PL-Stab Asstank covering the rear of attacking scouts and tanks. Though you could always have a human piloted blast/MDM asstank leading a seige while its protected by human blast tanks. The human element was always the more important than just the commander's own skill. It's still the same in 1.3 more or less its just easier (for better and worse) to rely on the AI more.

Same there ZA, with the old school talk . In most games that I last played it was quite easy to escape "unscathed" and if they have more skill then the person that is chasing them that is the drawback . Never doubt the AI and their scouts. Very useful to have a couple of full scouts for detection of enemy units and players when the human player is not fully aware.

[ADMIRAL MANSON]

The cons bills you when you give the order so it shouldn't cancel because your scrap bar changes.

Agreed.

[Zax]

You sir have demolished this rule.

"Do not double post. Double posting is the act of posting two or more responses in a row to a single thread within one week of each other."

[Clavin12]

Whatever is the purpose of that rule?

[Nielk1]

Holy heck...

[GSH]

The purpose of that rule is to help encourage people to not inflate their post counts by spamming. If your post is the last post in a thread, it's better to edit than to reply to the the thread and thus have multiple posts in a row.

-- GSH

[ADMIRAL MANSON]

Yeah sorry on that guys. Didn't have much to do for an off day .