Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
PSU: We came. We saw. We kicked its ass!
Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
Home | Forum | Chat | Wiki | Social | AGN | PS2 Stats |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
2005-02-05, 04:45 PM | [Ignore Me] #3 | ||
Staff Sergeant
|
Ok, taking out HA is kinda rediculous when its supposed to be more infantry based. The only problem that i have is that some of the empire's vehicles are specifically built to take out others which arnt going to be available to kill, thus kinda eliminating their strong area.
|
||
|
2005-02-07, 12:14 AM | [Ignore Me] #8 | |||
Contributor teh Sexb0t
|
__________________
[ Penis removed by Hamma. ] NEVAR FORGET THE SHUNK! (The Shunk Logs.) Violated by ChiaHamma |
|||
|
2005-02-07, 12:46 AM | [Ignore Me] #9 | |||
First Sergeant
|
I don't like the hint of neutral worlds and controlling the enemies home worlds granting extra benefits (on top of the battle island benefits). If the populations were even, and forced to stay that way, fine. Or, if there were even more meaningful population modifiers, also fine (I'm talking about delayed timers for the lower population). However, if you put in some extra benefits for owning the most neutral worlds and battle island benefits and benefits for controlling both enemies home continents etc., then that lower population empire will be in such a deep hole, I can't see them being able to fight out of it. That will give the forth empire even more incentive to flee the low pop empire. Sure, it makes great sense for a strategic purpose (something we have been lacking for a while), however, I really feel that the fourth empire, population imbalance, needs to be addressed before this comes out live. Dare I say it? One empire per server? Ok, gotta climb into the flame resistant suit for that one.
__________________
KIAsan [BWC] If it's not nailed down, it's mine. If I can pry it up, it's not nailed down. |
|||
|
|
Bookmarks |
|
|