|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Shijima Kuraimaru
WarRavens
168
   |
Posted - 2012.10.28 08:21:00 -
[1] - Quote
WHz DS9899 wrote:Now if I remember correctly, CCP said that there will be maps that get up to 50 sq. km. That's one huge ass map, and I want something to be small and fast to cross a map that big.
This is what LAVs and drop ships will be for. |
Shijima Kuraimaru
WarRavens
168
|
Posted - 2012.10.28 23:11:00 -
[2] - Quote
WHz DS9899 wrote:Shijima Kuraimaru wrote:WHz DS9899 wrote:Now if I remember correctly, CCP said that there will be maps that get up to 50 sq. km. That's one huge ass map, and I want something to be small and fast to cross a map that big. This is what LAVs and drop ships will be for. You don't know how to read a sentsnce fully, now do you? Now, I will repeat the sentence, but highlight: Now if I remember correctly, CCP said that there will be maps that get up to 50 sq. km. That's one huge ass map, and I want something to be small and fast to cross a map that big
You need to work on your comprehension now don't you? (If this made me sound like an idiot, just think how it made you sound when you did similar.)
No. I read it fully and understood. Just stating that there's already something meant for what you're saying you want the hover bikes for... Transport. Doesn't matter to me what armed and size variants you want. Your first point was transport. All else was irrelevant as far as I was concerned. |
Shijima Kuraimaru
WarRavens
168
|
Posted - 2012.10.31 01:41:00 -
[3] - Quote
WHz DS9899 wrote:Actually, you didn't understand at all, or you didn't read it. Like I said, I wanted something fast and small. Dropships are too big and LAV's are sore thumbs that are easy targets. The Hover Bikes are neither.
Like a dog with a bone aren't you?
It doesn't matter if it's fast and small. Your primary point was rapid transport and that's what LAV's are for as far as rapid overland transport is concerned.
I doubt very seriously that CCP is going to put in another form of ground transport when you can already call in a free LAV. And if they did implement it correctly, you'd end up with at most a lightly armed transport, that moves slightly faster than a LAV, with all the toughness of unmounted infantry, that can be locked onto with SWARMs.
If I thought it was something CCP might do, I'd be +1ing you and asking for the addition of a heat lance, blade vanes, and cluster caltrops. |
Shijima Kuraimaru
WarRavens
168
|
Posted - 2012.11.02 22:45:00 -
[4] - Quote
WHz DS9899 wrote:Shijima Kuraimaru wrote:WHz DS9899 wrote:Actually, you didn't understand at all, or you didn't read it. Like I said, I wanted something fast and small. Dropships are too big and LAV's are sore thumbs that are easy targets. The Hover Bikes are neither. Like a dog with a bone aren't you? It doesn't matter if it's fast and small. Your primary point was rapid transport and that's what LAV's are for as far as rapid overland transport is concerned. I doubt very seriously that CCP is going to put in another form of ground transport when you can already call in a free LAV. And if they did implement it correctly, you'd end up with at most a lightly armed transport, that moves slightly faster than a LAV, with all the toughness of unmounted infantry, that can be locked onto with SWARMs. If I thought it was something CCP might do, I'd be +1ing you and asking for the addition of a heat lance, blade vanes, and cluster caltrops. you seem not to get the point. The hover bike wiould be a more solo vehicle. and it wouldn't be justfor transport; there for drive-by combat (just so you won't be confused, it's when you go back and forth, or go past an area and try to kill as many enmies as possible.). There also could be for logi bros trying to get from point a to b faster than they do now with a LAV (or even with the LLV that's supposed to be coming.).
1. You can stop being a #unt just because someone disagrees with you.
2. My point still stands. It's unnecessary. I never said it wouldn't be fun. I never said it wasn't a good idea. I merely stated that CCP actually giving us hoverbikes, when we already have LAVs, is highly improbable. After all, I did say "If I thought it was something CCP might do, I'd be +1ing you and asking for the addition of a heat lance, blade vanes, and cluster caltrops." |
Shijima Kuraimaru
WarRavens
168
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 22:15:00 -
[5] - Quote
WHz DS9899 wrote:Shijima Kuraimaru wrote:1. You can stop being a #unt just because someone disagrees with you.
2. My point still stands. It's unnecessary. I never said it wouldn't be fun. I never said it wasn't a good idea. I merely stated that CCP actually giving us hoverbikes, when we already have LAVs, is highly improbable. After all, I did say "If I thought it was something CCP might do, I'd be +1ing you and asking for the addition of a heat lance, blade vanes, and cluster caltrops." But the LAV's and hover bikes would have a different role, because of size and crew. Since their smaller and faster, they're more of a "stealth" vehicle that most other vehicles like tanks won't even bother with you. And I'm not being a "#unt". You are not reading and thinking about it, and instead wanting to argue saying that it would be usless, when in fact these could win or lose a game. Just think about it.
And you accuse me of not reading. I never said it was useless. "I merely stated that CCP actually giving us hoverbikes, when we already have LAVs, is highly improbable.". And unnecessary doesn't = useless if that's what you were going on. |
|
|
| |
|