| 1 |
So no more Chainsaws ^^? I'd suggest redesigning them [the AA] then, not removing at all.
|
1 |
So no more Chainsaws ^^? I'd suggest redesigning them [the AA] then, not removing at all.
|
| 2 |
\n
|
2 |
\n
|
| 3 |
Why 1/3 range? Why not? 100% range would be way too OP ground balance-wise.
|
3 |
Why 1/3 range? Why not? 100% range would be way too OP ground balance-wise.
|
| 4 |
\n
|
4 |
\n
|
| 5 |
[quote]If
a
unit
has
AA
in
its
description
then
it
only
shoots
at
aircraft.
[/quite]
|
5 |
[quote]If
a
unit
has
AA
in
its
description
then
it
only
shoots
at
aircraft.
[/quote]
|
| 6 |
If an unit has AA in description one is sure its supposed to fire at aircraft only. On the other hand when one see ''bomber''in description he is quite sure that teh unit is supposed to fire at ground only, not at otehr aircraft units too...
|
6 |
If an unit has AA in description one is sure its supposed to fire at aircraft only. On the other hand when one see ''bomber''in description he is quite sure that teh unit is supposed to fire at ground only, not at otehr aircraft units too...
|
| 7 |
\n
|
7 |
\n
|
| 8 |
I dont want to argue with you, but your ''being logical'' reason fails at bombers. You either ''are logical'' and make bombers be anti ground only and AA anti aicraft only, or you are consistent and make both bombers and AA fire at eveyrthing.
|
8 |
I dont want to argue with you, but your ''being logical'' reason fails at bombers. You either ''are logical'' and make bombers be anti ground only and AA anti aicraft only, or you are consistent and make both bombers and AA fire at eveyrthing.
|
RAGE POST: Air diving