DUST Search - Okay so all this installation talk got me thinking.

ROMULUS H3X wrote:

jett it wrote:

ROMULUS H3X wrote:

jett it wrote:

ROMULUS H3X wrote:

The reasoning behind this to help keep the CRUs AND SUPPLY DEPOTS on the field a bit longer... they used to give the same amount of WP ( if not more ) as the turrets.. Making them prime targets for termination..

Hacking them FOR your team to utilize and protect is the type of game-play being forwarded.. PLAN B is destroying them so that the enemy can't use them, not for your own personal warpoint accumulation.

Understand?

The funny thing about that is I actually see more turret installations left alive compared to supply depots and CRU's

Still makes no sense.

If they are so important to the team and players they should pay more for the destruction.

That's because there ARE more Turrets than CRUs and SupDeps... logically there should be more hanging around. Besides that point, CRUs and SupDeps don't shoot back so more often than not you can find newberries tearing them up because they are "safe"

So if there are more turret installations then supply and cru's wouldn't it make more sense to pay more for the supply and cru kills.

Turret installs are easy as heck to kill.

Honestly i would rather go up against a turret installation shooting at me rather than 5 enemy spawning at a cru or a 6 for that matter swapping suits at a supply depot.

Still makes no sense but thanks.

You didn't invalidate any of my points.. starting to think you are not even trying to UNDERSTAND. Rather, you seem to be set on the 'I WANT MORE WP' agenda.. for destroying EXTREMELY useful installations.

Destroying them when they become problematic for your team is enough of a reward.

NO, it doesn't make sense to pay MORE for CRUs simply on the notion of there being more turrets on the field... Where do you get these ideas from? Please... can you at least make an ATTEMPT to show some forethought?

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
jett it Ancient Exiles. Bleeding Sun Conglomerate 464	Posted - 2015.10.13 16:17:00 - [1] - Quote Blaster and turret installations very easy to kill low shield and armor and yet you get 100wp for the kill. Supply depots and CRU's have crazy shield and armor and only pay 50wp per kill. Correct me if I am wrong but does it not make more sense to pay more wp for the harder kill? jettGaming - Youtube
Boot Booter Titans of Phoenix Damage LLC 1	Posted - 2015.10.13 16:25:00 - [2] - Quote It would also make sense that crus and supply pay more wp because they are more valuable. So there's two reasons.
XxBlazikenxX Pure Evil. Bleeding Sun Conglomerate 3	Posted - 2015.10.13 16:27:00 - [3] - Quote This has always bothered me as well. I personally you should get damage points and destruction points for installations and that the points should be normalized for all types of installations. Something like two 25 damage points and 50 points for destructions, bringing you to 100 points overall. This would also make it so that when someone steals your installation kill at the last second, you still get those 50 points for damaging it and the kill stealer only gets 50 points. Director of Pure Evil. Pure Evil. is mass recruiting, apply today and join a war of the Bleeding Sun vs everyone!
jett it Ancient Exiles. Bleeding Sun Conglomerate 464	Posted - 2015.10.13 16:36:00 - [4] - Quote XxBlazikenxX wrote: This has always bothered me as well. I personally you should get damage points and destruction points for installations and that the points should be normalized for all types of installations. Something like two 25 damage points and 50 points for destructions, bringing you to 100 points overall. This would also make it so that when someone steals your installation kill at the last second, you still get those 50 points for damaging it and the kill stealer only gets 50 points. Thats a great idea blaz and I too would love to see that happen sometime soon. jettGaming - Youtube
ROMULUS H3X research lab 812	Posted - 2015.10.13 16:41:00 - [5] - Quote The reasoning behind this to help keep the CRUs AND SUPPLY DEPOTS on the field a bit longer... they used to give the same amount of WP ( if not more ) as the turrets.. Making them prime targets for termination.. Hacking them FOR your team to utilize and protect is the type of game-play being forwarded.. PLAN B is destroying them so that the enemy can't use them, not for your own personal warpoint accumulation. Understand? FORGE/FLAYLOCK/FISTS PLASMA/PISTOL/PUNCH ALL OF YOU PUNKS GET HUMILIATED AFTER LUNCH!
Murder Medic Forty-Nine Fedayeen Minmatar Republic 262	Posted - 2015.10.13 16:42:00 - [6] - Quote I don't think we need to further encourage people to destroy the only installations that actually help (ammo for vehicles that otherwise have to recall, and spawns for blueberries too dumb to drop links)
Ateroith KILL-EM-QUICK Rise Of Legion. 238	Posted - 2015.10.13 16:44:00 - [7] - Quote Don't destroy supply depots, please. They did nothing to you. "...Rule #2 - Never start a fight. Rule #3 - Never lose one either." - Lee Child
jett it Ancient Exiles. Bleeding Sun Conglomerate 464	Posted - 2015.10.13 16:45:00 - [8] - Quote ROMULUS H3X wrote: The reasoning behind this to help keep the CRUs AND SUPPLY DEPOTS on the field a bit longer... they used to give the same amount of WP ( if not more ) as the turrets.. Making them prime targets for termination.. Hacking them FOR your team to utilize and protect is the type of game-play being forwarded.. PLAN B is destroying them so that the enemy can't use them, not for your own personal warpoint accumulation. Understand? The funny thing about that is I actually see more turret installations left alive compared to supply depots and CRU's Still makes no sense. If they are so important to the team and players they should pay more for the destruction. jettGaming - Youtube
Union118 Ikomari-Onu Enforcement Caldari State 755	Posted - 2015.10.13 16:55:00 - [9] - Quote jett it wrote: Blaster and turret installations very easy to kill low shield and armor and yet you get 100wp for the kill. Supply depots and CRU's have crazy shield and armor and only pay 50wp per kill. Correct me if I am wrong but does it not make more sense to pay more wp for the harder kill? I think they need to make all installations easier to kill cuz it takes to long. Aside from that i agree on more points for harder kills. Tanks should be worth like 200 wp a pop. Also if the installations were gone it would make people rely on equipment more often. Spawn links need a spawn time reduction. 15 seconds is way to long. I spawn in a cru more because of the link spawn time. If not the cru then i go ground spawn which is a pain cuz im farther than i want to be but by the time i reach a good placed link the time would have been the same. Everything takes to long in a fast paced game. Starter Fit Suits are OP :-)
Ahkhomi Cypher Opus Arcana 1	Posted - 2015.10.13 17:07:00 - [10] - Quote Just dont give points for destroying CRUs, Supply Depots or turrets. We all know that these things can be done for tactical reasons if needed. We also know that it's usually done for WP whoring purposes. TBD ringleader \| Yep Squad Spokesman

XxBlazikenxX Pure Evil. Bleeding Sun Conglomerate 3	Posted - 2015.10.13 17:09:00 - [11] - Quote Union118 wrote: jett it wrote: Blaster and turret installations very easy to kill low shield and armor and yet you get 100wp for the kill. Supply depots and CRU's have crazy shield and armor and only pay 50wp per kill. Correct me if I am wrong but does it not make more sense to pay more wp for the harder kill? I think they need to make all installations easier to kill cuz it takes to long. Aside from that i agree on more points for harder kills. Tanks should be worth like 200 wp a pop. Also if the installations were gone it would make people rely on equipment more often. Spawn links need a spawn time reduction. 15 seconds is way to long. I spawn in a cru more because of the link spawn time. If not the cru then i go ground spawn which is a pain cuz im farther than i want to be but by the time i reach a good placed link the time would have been the same. Everything takes to long in a fast paced game. CCP buffed the installation health because they used to be destroyed within seconds of a rail tank targeting it. Director of Pure Evil. Pure Evil. is mass recruiting, apply today and join a war of the Bleeding Sun vs everyone!
ROMULUS H3X research lab 812	Posted - 2015.10.13 17:10:00 - [12] - Quote jett it wrote: ROMULUS H3X wrote: The reasoning behind this to help keep the CRUs AND SUPPLY DEPOTS on the field a bit longer... they used to give the same amount of WP ( if not more ) as the turrets.. Making them prime targets for termination.. Hacking them FOR your team to utilize and protect is the type of game-play being forwarded.. PLAN B is destroying them so that the enemy can't use them, not for your own personal warpoint accumulation. Understand? The funny thing about that is I actually see more turret installations left alive compared to supply depots and CRU's Still makes no sense. If they are so important to the team and players they should pay more for the destruction. That's because there ARE more Turrets than CRUs and SupDeps... logically there should be more hanging around. Besides that point, CRUs and SupDeps don't shoot back so more often than not you can find newberries tearing them up because they are "safe" FORGE/FLAYLOCK/FISTS PLASMA/PISTOL/PUNCH ALL OF YOU PUNKS GET HUMILIATED AFTER LUNCH!
jett it Ancient Exiles. Bleeding Sun Conglomerate 464	Posted - 2015.10.13 17:16:00 - [13] - Quote ROMULUS H3X wrote: jett it wrote: ROMULUS H3X wrote: The reasoning behind this to help keep the CRUs AND SUPPLY DEPOTS on the field a bit longer... they used to give the same amount of WP ( if not more ) as the turrets.. Making them prime targets for termination.. Hacking them FOR your team to utilize and protect is the type of game-play being forwarded.. PLAN B is destroying them so that the enemy can't use them, not for your own personal warpoint accumulation. Understand? The funny thing about that is I actually see more turret installations left alive compared to supply depots and CRU's Still makes no sense. If they are so important to the team and players they should pay more for the destruction. That's because there ARE more Turrets than CRUs and SupDeps... logically there should be more hanging around. Besides that point, CRUs and SupDeps don't shoot back so more often than not you can find newberries tearing them up because they are "safe" So if there are more turret installations then supply and cru's wouldn't it make more sense to pay more for the supply and cru kills. Turret installs are easy as heck to kill. Honestly i would rather go up against a turret installation shooting at me rather than 5 enemy spawning at a cru or a 6 for that matter swapping suits at a supply depot. Still makes no sense but thanks. jettGaming - Youtube
Pharoahe RabbitGang 13 COILS 8	Posted - 2015.10.13 17:17:00 - [14] - Quote This is an atrocious idea that only hurts the teams. A wolf does not concern itself over the opinion of sheep
jerrmy12 kahoalii G0DS AM0NG MEN 1	Posted - 2015.10.13 17:21:00 - [15] - Quote Boot Booter wrote: It would also make sense that crus and supply pay more wp because they are more valuable. So there's two reasons. http://i.4cdn.org/mlp/1444581506139.gif Closed beta vet. ~~~!_~@-------THE~!!!)__SUN~!@(J)~((@RISES.~)(@#~!(~)~))(#~))()))))))__!
jett it Ancient Exiles. Bleeding Sun Conglomerate 464	Posted - 2015.10.13 17:28:00 - [16] - Quote Pharoahe wrote: This is an atrocious idea that only hurts the teams. So you would rather be spawn camped and killed? Or try swapping your suit only to be blown up by a scouts RE? Its not hard to see, cru's and supply depots are paying way less wp then they should. Sure they help the team controlling it but they also hurt the enemy team not controlling it. How can you not see that? Ohh I know Ill run in and hack the cru when 5 enemies are spawning, yeah great idea. If that cru or supply depot aint in your teams control they then become a target for destruction and being so hard to kill should pay twice the amount of WP. jettGaming - Youtube
Operative 1174 Uuali True Companion Planetary Requisitions 1	Posted - 2015.10.13 18:00:00 - [17] - Quote Murder Medic wrote: I don't think we need to further encourage people to destroy the only installations that actually help (ammo for vehicles that otherwise have to recall, and spawns for blueberries too dumb to drop links) Yep that's why it was done. I would like to see a difference in neutral or red installation wp for destruction. I don't know if that is like it is now but, no points for neutral because most times tankers are doing at for a good reason and not points. Then red gives 100 or maybe more points the longer it remains red. Likewise, if you cap it you get those extra points rather than the tanker for destroying it. CCP logic GÇô We fix what doesn't need breaking.
ROMULUS H3X research lab 812	Posted - 2015.10.13 18:07:00 - [18] - Quote jett it wrote: ROMULUS H3X wrote: jett it wrote: ROMULUS H3X wrote: The reasoning behind this to help keep the CRUs AND SUPPLY DEPOTS on the field a bit longer... they used to give the same amount of WP ( if not more ) as the turrets.. Making them prime targets for termination.. Hacking them FOR your team to utilize and protect is the type of game-play being forwarded.. PLAN B is destroying them so that the enemy can't use them, not for your own personal warpoint accumulation. Understand? The funny thing about that is I actually see more turret installations left alive compared to supply depots and CRU's Still makes no sense. If they are so important to the team and players they should pay more for the destruction. That's because there ARE more Turrets than CRUs and SupDeps... logically there should be more hanging around. Besides that point, CRUs and SupDeps don't shoot back so more often than not you can find newberries tearing them up because they are "safe" So if there are more turret installations then supply and cru's wouldn't it make more sense to pay more for the supply and cru kills. Turret installs are easy as heck to kill. Honestly i would rather go up against a turret installation shooting at me rather than 5 enemy spawning at a cru or a 6 for that matter swapping suits at a supply depot. Still makes no sense but thanks. You didn't invalidate any of my points.. starting to think you are not even trying to UNDERSTAND. Rather, you seem to be set on the 'I WANT MORE WP' agenda.. for destroying EXTREMELY useful installations. Destroying them when they become problematic for your team is enough of a reward. NO, it doesn't make sense to pay MORE for CRUs simply on the notion of there being more turrets on the field... Where do you get these ideas from? Please... can you at least make an ATTEMPT to show some forethought? FORGE/FLAYLOCK/FISTS PLASMA/PISTOL/PUNCH ALL OF YOU PUNKS GET HUMILIATED AFTER LUNCH!
Shart Machine Gallente Federation 21	Posted - 2015.10.13 19:39:00 - [19] - Quote Ahkhomi Cypher wrote: Just dont give points for destroying CRUs, Supply Depots or turrets. We all know that these things can be done for tactical reasons if needed. We also know that it's usually done for WP whoring purposes. I agree about the CRU and Supply Depot. It is more beneficial to capture them and let your team spawn or get ammo from it. Base installations should be worth nothing at least. There's nothing like getting into a game to find your supply depot destroyed in under 2 minutes.
jett it Ancient Exiles. Bleeding Sun Conglomerate 474	Posted - 2015.10.13 20:15:00 - [20] - Quote ROMULUS H3X wrote: jett it wrote: ROMULUS H3X wrote: jett it wrote: ROMULUS H3X wrote: The reasoning behind this to help keep the CRUs AND SUPPLY DEPOTS on the field a bit longer... they used to give the same amount of WP ( if not more ) as the turrets.. Making them prime targets for termination.. Hacking them FOR your team to utilize and protect is the type of game-play being forwarded.. PLAN B is destroying them so that the enemy can't use them, not for your own personal warpoint accumulation. Understand? The funny thing about that is I actually see more turret installations left alive compared to supply depots and CRU's Still makes no sense. If they are so important to the team and players they should pay more for the destruction. That's because there ARE more Turrets than CRUs and SupDeps... logically there should be more hanging around. Besides that point, CRUs and SupDeps don't shoot back so more often than not you can find newberries tearing them up because they are "safe" So if there are more turret installations then supply and cru's wouldn't it make more sense to pay more for the supply and cru kills. Turret installs are easy as heck to kill. Honestly i would rather go up against a turret installation shooting at me rather than 5 enemy spawning at a cru or a 6 for that matter swapping suits at a supply depot. Still makes no sense but thanks. You didn't invalidate any of my points.. starting to think you are not even trying to UNDERSTAND. Rather, you seem to be set on the 'I WANT MORE WP' agenda.. for destroying EXTREMELY useful installations. Destroying them when they become problematic for your team is enough of a reward. NO, it doesn't make sense to pay MORE for CRUs simply on the notion of there being more turrets on the field... Where do you get these ideas from? Please... can you at least make an ATTEMPT to show some forethought? Already told you bro, when 5 enemies spawn a cru or there are 6 enemies at a supply depot spamming nades how in the heck are you suppose to capture that? Makes no sense. The next best thing is to destroy it and being very hard to destroy they should be worth more wp. I dont care about war points honestly, its more so the effort. Players trying to kill such a tough installation then finally getting the kill with out it being stolen from them and they get a tiny 50wp the same as killing 1 clone on the battlefield. lol is all i can say. So how are installations held by the enemy extremely useful to the other team? Explain that for me... jettGaming - Youtube

Darth-Carbonite GIO Random Gunz Rise Of Legion. 2	Posted - 2015.10.13 20:42:00 - [21] - Quote Because Depots and CRUs are meant to be important, long lasting, strategic focal points for your team, and therefore you are encouraged to take and defend them rather than destroy them. Whereas turrets in the hands of the enemy are an immediate threat, and you are rewarded for eliminating that risk to your team. You could of course make an argument that CRUs are just as much of a threat as turrets in a competitive sense, but they were always intended to be things you fought over, rather than just remove. "Sex is OK!" -CCP Rouge our benevolent overlord "Why does everyone fellatiate Darth? Why?!" -Aeon Amadi
ROMULUS H3X research lab 819	Posted - 2015.10.13 20:46:00 - [22] - Quote Since you asked, let me explain what you keep missing. You see that CRU with the entire team spewing out? Ya that means there are pretty much NO uplinks on the field. Which shows you are fighting AMATEURS. That means once you redline them by destroying that last spawn point, your team will basically have a secure victory. Note that is enough of a reward on its own, I have already stated this. Yet you pick and choose what you want to comprehend apparently. I never said not to destroy it, nor did I say it is more advantageous for your team to not have the CRU or supdep... I am saying that destruction of useful installations should be PLAN B. Can you get that through your thick skull yet? FORGE/FLAYLOCK/FISTS PLASMA/PISTOL/PUNCH ALL OF YOU PUNKS GET HUMILIATED AFTER LUNCH!
jett it Ancient Exiles. Bleeding Sun Conglomerate 474	Posted - 2015.10.13 20:58:00 - [23] - Quote Darth-Carbonite GIO wrote: Because Depots and CRUs are meant to be important, long lasting, strategic focal points for your team, and therefore you are encouraged to take and defend them rather than destroy them. Whereas turrets in the hands of the enemy are an immediate threat, and you are rewarded for eliminating that risk to your team. You could of course make an argument that CRUs are just as much of a threat as turrets in a competitive sense, but they were always intended to be things you fought over, rather than just remove. Totally agreed with you darth. Just wanted to ask a few things. Okay so when we get redlined for instance, i sneak back onto the battlefield and hack a cru closer to the objective. Well the enemy sees right away enemy hacking clone reanimation unit and before a team mate could even spawn in to try and defend that cru with me there is already 6 enemies back camping that cru. The same goes for supply depots, lets say you hack a supply depot it then almost seems a enemy was just waiting for you to hack that, then destroyed not even a minute later. But I do see the sense behind the reason for cheap wp on the destruction's, thanks for explaining it clearly. I just think if an installation pays 100wp and cru's n supply's only 50 maybe they should knock that turret wp down to 25wp to be fair. How many noobs you think killed a cru with all that armor and shield took them 5 minutes getting all excited for big wp only to realize they could have killed 1 enemy to earn the same wp. I know the point you guys are trying to make they want you to kill turret installations and dont want you to kill crus and supply depots, but it does not really makes sense during game play. jettGaming - Youtube
jett it Ancient Exiles. Bleeding Sun Conglomerate 474	Posted - 2015.10.13 21:00:00 - [24] - Quote ROMULUS H3X wrote: Since you asked, let me explain what you keep missing. You see that CRU with the entire team spewing out? Ya that means there are pretty much NO uplinks on the field. Which shows you are fighting AMATEURS. That means once you redline them by destroying that last spawn point, your team will basically have a secure victory. Note that is enough of a reward on its own, I have already stated this. Yet you pick and choose what you want to comprehend apparently. I never said not to destroy it, nor did I say it is more advantageous for your team to not have the CRU or supdep... I am saying that destruction of useful installations should be PLAN B. Can you get that through your thick skull yet? Getting a little mad? Sorry I did not read your post nor do I intend to. I dont want to argue guys n gals. My bottom line is the turret to cru / supply wp does not seem right. Wanna make it fair knock that installation wp down to 25.Then it all makes sense. jettGaming - Youtube
Operative 1174 Uuali True Companion Planetary Requisitions 1	Posted - 2015.10.13 21:57:00 - [25] - Quote Darth-Carbonite GIO wrote: Because Depots and CRUs are meant to be important, long lasting, strategic focal points for your team, and therefore you are encouraged to take and defend them rather than destroy them. Whereas turrets in the hands of the enemy are an immediate threat, and you are rewarded for eliminating that risk to your team. You could of course make an argument that CRUs are just as much of a threat as turrets in a competitive sense, but they were always intended to be things you fought over, rather than just remove. Reward infantry with a cookie in the form of one strongbox key per minute that they defend their CRU, depot and turrets and watch the game improve immensely. As it is it's a waste of time and I'm going to take them out when they go red as they inevitably always do. CCP logic GÇô We fix what doesn't need breaking.
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 1	Posted - 2015.10.13 22:52:00 - [26] - Quote simply put CRUs and Supply depots can't shoot back. You might as well be asking why is it 5 WP per equipment kill but 50WP per infantry. Same logic applies. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me. "I sometimes wonder why I share stuff "- CCP Rattati
ROMULUS H3X research lab 819	Posted - 2015.10.13 23:10:00 - [27] - Quote jett it wrote: ROMULUS H3X wrote: Since you asked, let me explain what you keep missing. You see that CRU with the entire team spewing out? Ya that means there are pretty much NO uplinks on the field. Which shows you are fighting AMATEURS. That means once you redline them by destroying that last spawn point, your team will basically have a secure victory. Note that is enough of a reward on its own, I have already stated this. Yet you pick and choose what you want to comprehend apparently. I never said not to destroy it, nor did I say it is more advantageous for your team to not have the CRU or supdep... I am saying that destruction of useful installations should be PLAN B. Can you get that through your thick skull yet? Getting a little mad? Sorry I did not read your post nor do I intend to. I dont want to argue guys n gals. My bottom line is the turret to cru / supply wp does not seem right. Wanna make it fair knock that installation wp down to 25.Then it all makes sense. Just because I call you out on being thick headed doesn't mean I am "Getting a little mad.." more like astonished by the assumptions you come to by apparently "not reading" and quoting responses. For future reference: If you don't want to get into an argumentative conversation, then you shouldn't respond to comments without reading them (Which you clearly stated). Ya, but anyways "I'm mad"... FORGE/FLAYLOCK/FISTS PLASMA/PISTOL/PUNCH ALL OF YOU PUNKS GET HUMILIATED AFTER LUNCH!
Juno Tristan Obscure Reference 917	Posted - 2015.10.14 03:21:00 - [28] - Quote It's to promote certain play style Turrets pose little threat to infantry (if unmanned), the threat is against vehicles so they are rewarded for destroying them CRUs/Supply depots are crucial for infantry and can be key for a team to win. With a high WP payment tanks might kill it even though the blues are likely to hack it back, getting a selfish WP reward. The low WP means the tank needs a good reason to destroy it as the time taken leaves it exposed ADS Ramming Revenge! Plasma Cannon Rampage
jett it Ancient Exiles. Bleeding Sun Conglomerate 486	Posted - 2015.10.14 12:41:00 - [29] - Quote Most of you are oblivious to the point I am trying to make. Goes in 1 ear and out the other. But thats okay. If they are meant to be so darn important on the field why not give them 100,000 armor and let them pay 200wp that way it takes half the battle to even destroy them. Oh i will kill two per battle and get 400wp, yep thats a good battle. lol. It does not make sense at all the way it is setup now. Sorry if you dont agree, you simply dont play enough to see my side of the view. How many times have you been spawned camped at a cru compared to an actual player killing you at a turret installation? Play the game more pls. So you guys are promoting spawning at a cru camped by 4 enemies waiting for you to spawn in and slaughter you before you can even turn around? If you get redlined I usually sneak in and drop links, for those that dont have links they hack a cru and the enemy sees that right away. Before any1 even spawns at the cru there are enemies camping it. It actually sounds like a flaw in the game. Want the cru back you gotta go 1 vs 5 to even have the chance of hacking it. I honestly think destroying that cru would give the team a better outcome, this way 10 players wouldn't die from cru camps and you would still have those 10 clones. Basically with the wp they pay it works no one wants to kill them, but that does not really work for the team that does not have it in their control especially if they are getting redlined it makes their chances worse of actually getting back into the fight. I would say its all a little too 1 sided. Why do you think ambush is such an effective game mode? I will let you answer that yourself. jettGaming - Youtube
Shart Machine Gallente Federation 23	Posted - 2015.10.14 14:52:00 - [30] - Quote jett it wrote: Most of you are oblivious to the point I am trying to make. Goes in 1 ear and out the other. But thats okay. If they are meant to be so darn important on the field why not give them 100,000 armor and let them pay 200wp that way it takes half the battle to even destroy them. Oh i will kill two per battle and get 400wp, yep thats a good battle. lol. It does not make sense at all the way it is setup now. Sorry if you dont agree, you simply dont play enough to see my side of the view. -cut out text- I honestly think destroying that cru would give the team a better outcome, this way 10 players wouldn't die from cru camps and you would still have those 10 clones. -cut out text- If everybody is oblivious to your point, then maybe you should come out and say it instead of crying "play more". Put some objective evidence behind your point instead of giving situational gameplay experiences. Ignoring the counterpoints isn't helping your cause. Clones don't really matter when you are in your redline, you are bound to lose one way or another. Destroying the CRU only gimps your team if you get out of redline because now your team's closest spawn is limited to uplinks, and those are finite and easy to destroy. You can't trust your teammates to deploy them either. I really think you have a shot of starting a real discussion, but you are poisoning it with the extreme claims and a bad attitude.



Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page