Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
PSU: Don't eat the yellow snow. Please.
Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
Home | Forum | Chat | Wiki | Social | AGN | PS2 Stats |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
2013-05-28, 10:33 AM | [Ignore Me] #1 | ||
ReachCast Show
|
This weeks question is ...
Should the Dome Shield Emitter be something that can be disabled? as always if you would like to call or email in your answer below is that info Email us at [email protected] Call us at (415)787-3224 |
||
|
2013-05-28, 12:54 PM | [Ignore Me] #2 | ||
First Sergeant
|
Yes, the domes are very powerful buffers between infantry and aircraft, protecting aircraft from AA. But, with such a powerful buffer, it shouldn't be permanent and is something that can, through work, be disabled.
I would say put it underground or just place it well in the base, so that it is something the defenders must be mindful of, but attackers don't have to have entirely won the base in order to deal with. Remember that it'll be a double edged sword to take it down: Yeah you are now exposing defenders to aircraft, but you are also exposing attackers to aircraft. |
||
|
2013-05-28, 03:40 PM | [Ignore Me] #7 | |||
First Sergeant
|
No, it can go down when the SCU falls, but it should have a separate generator. Frankly, I think the SCU should have a generator as well, centrally located so it can be defended from the spawn room, and in tight corridors. |
|||
|
2013-05-30, 05:25 PM | [Ignore Me] #11 | |||
Corporal
|
I have never seen a more artificial implementation of "We said so" in game design, period. I'm not generally given to hyperbole, but I think these aircraft shields could break the game for a large percentage of the population. (looking at you TRAF). With the unbreakable tank shields I have already cursed pouring thousands of certs into vanguards, prowlers and lightnings. Beacon spawns are the only useful way of transport now. |
|||
|
2013-05-30, 01:08 PM | [Ignore Me] #12 | ||
Sergeant
|
The more options for defense, the better. Yes, I think it should be something that players can disable. It should also be part of an NTU-like system which allows players to starve out a base and its defenses by depriving it of nanite.
|
||
|
2013-05-30, 01:17 PM | [Ignore Me] #13 | ||
Alrighty. Writing up a lenghty email as we speak... Well, type. You know what I mean.
__________________
Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a feature *Disclaimer: When participating in a discussion I do not do so in the capacity of a semidivine moderator. Feel free to disagree with any of my opinions.
|
|||
|
2013-05-30, 02:01 PM | [Ignore Me] #14 | ||
Private
|
What's the point of the shield again?
I mean, what does it bring to the game that isn't already there and/or shouldn't be there reached via other means? Biolab for example already has a "shield", i.e. the dome. I think other bases should work that way too. We need more walls, or more to the point, roofs and ceilings, not magical shields. |
||
|
|
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|