Author Topic: Double Barrel Gp (Read 11520 times)

Betaray · « **Reply #25 on:** August 23, 2006, 08:34:06 PM »

I dont see how a double barrel gp could be considered an uber weapon, I mean tigers arnt uber weapons, so how could a not moving tiger be an uber weapon, even if the dmg is increased if it is hooked up to a cc?

croxis · « **Reply #26 on:** August 23, 2006, 11:00:41 PM »

People throw temper tantrums when I suggest new ideas.

Freeza-CII · « **Reply #27 on:** August 23, 2006, 11:17:19 PM »

The Tiger is nothing more then a movable GP Having a Double Barrel GP looking turret would just mean its going to have twice the power like a tiger does over a lynx or panther. They would cost more use more power and would have the same range for there weapon and sight. There not going to be any more uber then a tiger. They dont move from there spot and have more HP then a tiger any way.

Having all this realism bulls*** with how it turns and making one faster and the other slower and the complexity of calculating the ACCURACY based on turret speed distance to targer and target speed is just bogus. The Turrets are just like the vecs they basicly turn and fire on the enemy not this slow moving bulls***. They wouldnt be uber just better then a regular turret and they would have a rare ore cost to them. They wouldnt take up any more room then a normal turret. Making all this REALISM for the GP turrets would then have to be put on the vecs as well and you can pretty much forget that. Just have the turrets for any thing work the way they do already. A absolutely horrid term i am about to use. KISS Keep it simple stupid.

croxis · « **Reply #28 on:** August 24, 2006, 01:20:26 PM »

One fallacy with KISS: Tic Tac Toe.

LIke I've said time and time again, real ism isn't bad if it adds to gameplay.

Again I have two words that nullifies your entire argument: Play balance.

Freeza-CII · « **Reply #29 on:** August 24, 2006, 01:48:38 PM »

you say things but you dont explain them put up or shut up you know that term right.

Tic Tac Toe is simple the person that goes first wins pretty much by putting what ever in the right spot and causing a 2 lines and only one that can be blocked very simple there is nothing complex about that.

Its a turret that fires faster using twin barrels its a Statonary defencive weapon and like the Single barrel guard post it is kill able it can be EMPED it just fires faster they take up more space then a unit so spamming them becomes harder plus spamming the GP means you need alot of power because a GP is what 50 power these double barrel gps would take 75. BOTH f***ING SIDES WOULD HAVE IT

. Its very simple twin barrels of the same weapons or any new weapon that is or might be in the game some building cost difference in price and time to build. You seem to think this is going to be the END ALL MOTHER f***ER WEAPON it wont be because its a turret it doesnt move around the map it stays at the place it was built. Dual Thors Turret no different then a tiger that sits there only gps have more hit points i believe and the dual would have more of course because its bigger.

You want to add all this REALISM. IS it really needed that much. This isnt a first person shooter or a simulation so it doesnt need all this complicated leading of the target or the slower turret has more accuracy or even worry about turret speed. Just keep the turret turning like it is. RTS with all this crap in it will be slow imagen the LAG caused by 200+ units all calculating all this crap at the same time.

Betaray · « **Reply #30 on:** August 24, 2006, 02:39:52 PM »

thankfully turrets only use up 10 power, so a double barrel gp would probly take 20, basicly it would mean its a dencer firefield, that coupled with hopefully it would have higher hp (probly 750 instead of 500) would make it a nice heavy defencive position

Freeza-CII · « **Reply #31 on:** August 24, 2006, 03:17:17 PM »

but vecs out number gps any way they just try to shore up the numbers a bit

croxis · « **Reply #32 on:** August 24, 2006, 04:44:30 PM »

Generally the people and places I hang out with, we don't treat each other like s***. (Hence a bit reason why I read digg over slashdot.)

Let me put it to you this way because any and all attempts of explaining have ultimately failed. The suggestions I make is NOT IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM ADDING REALISM FOR THE SAKE OF REALISM.

Let me say it again just so you are quite clear what I am saying. Everything I have or will suggest has nothing to do with making the game more realistic. You have the most bazar paradigm in your head right now.

Everything is to add and develop gameplay. Period.

And one again, two works that make your argument pointless: Play balance.

Betaray · « **Reply #33 on:** August 24, 2006, 10:49:32 PM »

the only way to determin if something is balanced on a new engine is to try it out

there is no point in argueing about hypothetical balance because neither of you know for sure until it is tested out with the op3 engine, thats how games are made, ideas our proposed and tested, and the ones that dont work are weeded out, there is no point in argueing over hypothetical concepts

Freeza-CII · « **Reply #34 on:** August 25, 2006, 02:05:29 PM »

OMG if both side have the Double barrel turret then it would be balance because the cost of the weapons is also relefected on the f***ing GPs EDEN Double BArrel THOR PLY Double Barrel ESG. Different Cost Like i said before More power comsumtion like i said before Both side have access to this Tech like i said before Its not different then both sides having tigers. All this does it give a heavier defensive weapon.

moderated by TH300

BlackBox · « **Reply #35 on:** August 25, 2006, 02:21:55 PM »

The game is balanced as is. We don't need 'dual turret GPs' the current GPs are stronger than tigers.

If you want 'dual turret GPs' then just change the artwork to a thing with two turrets.

As for figuring with "the turn speed has to be slower for the weight" or whatever, no one's gonna notice unless it's some "mega weapon" turning as fast as a laser. But other than that you don't have to throw this huge amount of realism.

Betaray · « **Reply #36 on:** August 25, 2006, 02:48:02 PM »

well seeing how this is op3 we are talking about not op2, we have no idea what is balanced and what isnt, op3 will have a different combat system than op2 thus allowing things that might be unbalanced in op2 perfectly balanced

again, the only way to tell with a new game if something is balanced is to test it, until we can do that, there is no point in argueing, just put your idea up for grabs so that it can be tested in turn, and everyone else just accept that, unless its something so out there that its not even worthy of the testers and coders time

again, argueing over something like this is pointless, neither side knows what the combat system in op3 will be like and thus put up a solid argument backed by facts

BlackBox · « **Reply #37 on:** August 25, 2006, 03:02:22 PM »

Quote

well seeing how this is op3 we are talking about not op2, we have no idea what is balanced and what isnt, op3 will have a different combat system than op2 thus allowing things that might be unbalanced in op2 perfectly balanced

Yes, but it's based off of OP2, I wouldn't expect it to change terribly much.

But yes, I agree its pointless to keep arguing about this.

Leviathan · « **Reply #38 on:** July 10, 2007, 02:17:36 PM »

I love the idea of new and improved fortifications, walls, and more powerfull turrets and guard posts.

BlackBox · « **Reply #39 on:** July 10, 2007, 10:25:56 PM »

This topic was closed already? And it seems discussion is pretty much over. No reason to necro a topic that is a year old.

News:

Author Topic: Double Barrel Gp (Read 11520 times)