Jump to content

Nodlied

Staff Moderators
  • Posts

    4,150
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    125
  • Donations

    50.00 USD 

Everything posted by Nodlied

  1. Last time I lynched Voe D1, he was lynchproof, resulting in my death. I was then revived after Liten left the game, after which I was shot for trying to lynch Voe. It was sooo worth it.
  2. If so, we'll just shoot him on D2, there, problem solved.
  3. The ''fool'' is pretty much the most broken rol in the entire game, so unless Verti decided to break a classic game, it won't be in here.
  4. Yeah, I don't really believe that. Especially considering that Verti probably wouldn't break the very first game by introducing a ''fool'' role. ##Unvote ##Vote Generalcamo
  5. Your push without reason is starting to annoy me. ##Vote Fraydo
  6. You do know that a NoLynch only benifits scum, right?
  7. Urge to not get betrayed by Isaac intensifies. In any case, Gencamo, I'm awaiting your defense.
  8. I'm going to go ahead and say that I currently find Generalcamo and Fraydo. >First day. >Calling people out for inactivity. >Does not consider the fact that they may have forgotten about the game, or the fact that they may not yet have had time to play. You're pushing too hard on a bad reason, and that's usually a scumtell. See above. Especially when he's the final boss.
  9. So we're looking for three allies? That is suspicious as i think it was no where mentioned that there where 3 spies so explain yourself. Scum teams usually consist of 25% of the players. We have 10 players, 25% of which is 2.5, rounded up is 3. Since nodlied did indeed retract his vote, I: ##Vote NoLynch It is a bit of a bullshit reason to vote for somebody for a standard jokevote. Feel free to assume that you're now considered suspicious.
  10. >Retracting vote >Midnight over in Dutchieland You WoT M8. ##Unvote Jokephase is over. (Fewer than 12 hours remaining and the jokephase already started a bit of a discussion, so that's great.) So we're looking for three allies? That is suspicious as i think it was no where mentioned that there where 3 spies so explain yourself. Agreed with Cat5 and triattack.
  11. Doublepost because Mafia doesn't allow editing posts. I should probably clarify that not all jokevotes are put on Voe. (For the simple reason that it would result in a D1 hammer. And a D1 Voe hammer always has hilarious if bad results.)
  12. Among the old crew, it is a known tradition that all jokevotes are put on Voe during the D1 jokephase. Other than the D1 jokephase vote, I normally will not vote until I'm very suspicious of somebody.
  13. Oh boy! Tradition time! 'ere we go! ##Vote Voe
  14. I'm not up for continueing that overly complex game.
  15. Oh man, the old crew is coming back!
  16. I'd actually prefer a forum game, not least due to time issues. (And complex strategies are fun, which the forum variant allows for.)
  17. How can you even compare the RotR situation to the APB one? The W3D Ren engine has the possiblities to choose between different models/camouflage build into its core. Being able to make a choice has been there since the beginning. ZH's SAGE doesn't have such a thing as camouflage choice other than the ''buildvariants:1,2,3,etc'' code in a unit.ini. The new snow camouflage in RotR for the PAK FA is even a map dependend .ini modification. As for forced model changes themselves, that's usually not a problem since most model updates are a massive improvement over the old ones. Those that are not always a massive improvement can actually cause some complaints. (Such as the Frogfoot being replaced.)
  18. Even though I lack time these days, I'd be up for another try.
  19. Actually, when you infiltrate the radar dome as a spy, you will provide your team with free radar.
  20. Actually, I've been bothered by the fixed camouflage in AR ever since it was implemented. I just stopped complaining about it because nothing was being done about it. (That + I'm not in charge of the game and cannot force decisions unless it's testing/release readyness related.)
  21. I agree with Raap, as much as locking camo to maps makes sense, it also removes player choice. And it is this player choice that allows them to customise their units a bit. Besides, there are maps where multiple camouflage patterns are viable. (Complex with urban and winter, Seamist with desert and forest, etc)
  22. Before I start, don't take my post as a negative one. Anything left unmentioned can be considered ok/good enough/great. (Pick whatever you want. ) Potential issues: Capturing the tech structures is far too easy. Not because they're easy to reach, but because they can all be captured by one engineer. This will result in less of a fight on the icebergs and more of a tug-o-war without casualties between engineers. Subs have a far too easy time setting up ambushes or hiding from any dangers due to the icebergs. Due to their ability to pivot and strafe, combined with the excelent turn rate, they don't really have any problems taking down gunboats around the icebergs. Even though the boats are more manoeuvrable than before, they still don't have an easy time turning between the icebergs to bring their gun to bear. Of course, one can brake and reverse but it either takes too much time or the sub will retreat below the icebergs. Suggestions: Adding another naval repair tech structure, this to not force subs and ships back to base after a fight if they want to stand another chance in a direct confrontation, especially on a map like this. Food for thought for other people wishing to provide feedback: Lonbows destroying subs (with the exception of counterstriking missilesubs), is somewhat balanced out by their stealthyness. A sub can get from one point of the map to another while being completely hidden. Ships, however, cannot, and they can be seen from miles away and do not have the luxery to hide beneath icebergs. That's why Hinds are not effective against them. Some naval unit balancing may seem odd, this is not always the fault of the map (see my feedback above), but can have something to do with how subs and boats work at the moment, which we may be unable to fix until later, if at all.
  23. Ehm... I fail to see what this argument is trying to prove. Old things are used constantly. If things work, they work. And if the soldiers in the field/whoever, have not been issued anything better, then sure, it will pop up. Why fix it when it's not broken? That can be said for a lot of old things. Especially if they do the job well enough. As always, we disagree. That will never change. However, I think that it's safe to assume that, considering that we're comparing the two games and their factions, we'll be limited to what's actually cannon and found in the game. The RA connection to TD will have to be considered fan-fiction at this point. (However, I do - gasp - agree that the RA > TD connection would make for a better and more interesting story.) You don't mass-field prototype technology. If it works, you field it en-massed. If not, then you'll limit it to only a few elite regiments. Heat-seeking missiles, for example, function throughout the game. Sometimes, they do fail to function, but I blame that more on human error and battlefield conditions than failure of technology. And yes, it is impractical to show in-game, thus limiting us to what's in the game. Oh, and to prove my point that it's not Korean-era tech, the first guided MANPADs, as seen in the game, didn't come into existance until our late 1960s. (Just one example.) While migs are indeed not under your command from the start, the highly advanced spy plane, however, is available pretty early on, specifically Soviet mission 4. (Funnily enough, this is also when gap generators are introduced for the allied enemies.) If such an advanced high-speed spy plane is available for just about anyone, then I'm pretty sure that the normal mig fighter and the badger aren't that high tech either. In effect, it means that this kind of technology was available from the start.
×
×
  • Create New...