1 |
[q]Hovers, amph, whatever else you like also use that terrain to go around the back irrespective of who can climb it, I guess. [/q]
|
1 |
[q]Hovers, amph, whatever else you like also use that terrain to go around the back irrespective of who can climb it, I guess. [/q]
|
2 |
But i don't like hover and archer. :P
|
2 |
But i don't like hover and archer. :P
|
3 |
\n
|
3 |
\n
|
4 |
[q]Does knowing that thought process help or can you give me a good argument as to why veh/hover/tanks should have full access to the terrain? [/q]
|
4 |
[q]Does knowing that thought process help or can you give me a good argument as to why veh/hover/tanks should have full access to the terrain? [/q]
|
5 |
Generally i don't feel like the existence of flatlands on this particular map gives for example Rover much of an advantage over, say, Cloak, especially given the obstacle ratio.
|
5 |
Generally i don't feel like the existence of flatlands on this particular map gives for example Rover much of an advantage over, say, Cloak, especially given the obstacle ratio.
|
6 |
\n
|
6 |
\n
|
7 |
The enemy getting to polish that with unraidable high-efficiency energy economy just feels unfair.
|
7 |
The enemy getting to polish that with unraidable high-efficiency energy economy just feels unfair.
|
|
|
8 |
\n
|
|
|
9 |
I think you will observe that in the frequency of factory picks and wins once there's enough data.
|