Forged Alliance Forever

Re: Seraphim destroyers

2012-11-09T05:28:38+02:00

I still disagree but as long as I can kill my retarded teammates with nuke or TML or T2 bomber or strats (take ur pick) I'm cool with it.

Statistics: Posted by -_V_- — 09 Nov 2012, 05:28

Re: Seraphim destroyers

2012-11-08T23:42:38+02:00

GallantDragon wrote:
Imagine how you would feel if you lost a game because a squad of planes just happened to get in the way of your nuke as it was launching,

Well that actually happened to me a couple of times It is possible to block a launching/landing nuke with planes but you need a lot of luck.

As much as I like playing simulators FA is not one of them, it is still just an RTS game and we should not get too attached to details like perfectly simulating a battlefield and focus more on balancing and keeping the game fun

Statistics: Posted by BenDover — 08 Nov 2012, 23:42

Re: Seraphim destroyers

2012-11-08T21:30:59+02:00

Its ok- We're not shooting for realism, we're shooting for AWESOME

Statistics: Posted by Softly — 08 Nov 2012, 21:30

Re: Seraphim destroyers

2012-11-08T20:56:12+02:00

Well, the problem with realism is that if realism becomes overemphasized you eventually get to a point where really important things such as fun, balance, and not-giving-you-a-headache-nessend up being sacrificed to the altar of realism.

And I think we can argue that since this is a game, those things are pretty important.

SupCom isn't the kind of game where those extremely nitpicky aspects of unit positioning and micromanagement could be implemented and work. Imagine how you would feel if you lost a game because a squad of planes just happened to get in the way of your nuke as it was launching, or your entire navy got destroyed due to friendly fire? Even if better unit AI got implemented which prevents Seraphim destroyers from shooting if friendly units were in the way, this would drastically alter the balance of naval engagements, because it would be far more difficult for Sera players to bring their navy to bear properly.

SC FA isn't Total War. This is a game of large-scale strategy, not unit positioning.

Statistics: Posted by GallantDragon — 08 Nov 2012, 20:56

Re: Seraphim destroyers

2012-11-08T18:23:33+02:00

lasers don't follow a ballistic trajectory so they shouldn't have to come under your idea of realism

Statistics: Posted by Softly — 08 Nov 2012, 18:23

Re: Seraphim destroyers

2012-11-08T16:39:51+02:00

This relation is debatable.

I'm not saying the game should be entirely realistic. I simply remember that CT emphasized the ballistic approach of the game as a key point of the game. So logically I expect the game to follow that path. And really it doesn't make sense that a missile goes through my units without damaging it.

Statistics: Posted by -_V_- — 08 Nov 2012, 16:39

Re: Seraphim destroyers

2012-11-08T15:42:52+02:00

Well if we wanted realism then we'd be wondering why stuff is so big, when the speed it moves is so high. The physics of all that simply don't add up, why should the rest of it?

Statistics: Posted by Softly — 08 Nov 2012, 15:42

Re: Seraphim destroyers

2012-11-08T12:29:30+02:00

Oh my bad, I thought one main aspect of THIS game was to be realistic, especially in the ...bullet trajectories, ballistics, etc..
Funny shit.

You must be right. It makes more sense to receive a huge laser in the face and nothing happens.

I think I read the description for the wrong game. I'm sorry.

Statistics: Posted by -_V_- — 08 Nov 2012, 12:29

Re: Seraphim destroyers

2012-11-08T11:22:33+02:00

Im sorry, have you ever played this game? Imagine 50 planes clumped together starting to fire, they would butcher themselves before killing anything. Same goes for land units, I think theres a perfectly good reason why only select few units have the ability to damage allied and own units, simply because otherwise this game would make no sense.

Statistics: Posted by BenDover — 08 Nov 2012, 11:22

Re: Seraphim destroyers

2012-11-08T07:30:27+02:00

Like ? how so ?
Why would it be so special for *this* game ?

Statistics: Posted by -_V_- — 08 Nov 2012, 07:30

Re: Seraphim destroyers

2012-11-07T20:57:22+02:00

Friendly fire would not work with the mechanics of this game. it would make all but a select few units useless and increase micro to a completely new level.

Statistics: Posted by noobymcnoobcake — 07 Nov 2012, 20:57

Re: Seraphim destroyers

2012-11-07T17:53:21+02:00

... so you want to change this game into total mayhem with no predictability whatsoever? Concept of friendly fire in this game will never work, there are too often too many units clumped togehter to even hope this would work.

Statistics: Posted by BenDover — 07 Nov 2012, 17:53

Re: Seraphim destroyers

2012-11-07T17:39:52+02:00

Well it would act the same way for both opponents so ...

Statistics: Posted by -_V_- — 07 Nov 2012, 17:39

Re: Seraphim destroyers

2012-11-07T13:24:14+02:00

Friendly fire on all units in this game might work if battles were between 30 units, on a large scale this is beyond control not to mention the terrible pathfinding system. IMO my point stands, sera destroyers laser should pass through allied units because ally can always give you his fleet and all its doing is causing unnecessary confusion.

Statistics: Posted by BenDover — 07 Nov 2012, 13:24

Re: Seraphim destroyers

2012-11-07T12:44:18+02:00

Iszh wrote:
poor cybran t1 army or lobo spammer they would blow their own army/base to heaven when enemy is rushing through with scouts xD

Let's have it!

Statistics: Posted by -_V_- — 07 Nov 2012, 12:44