Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   

Post edit history

Long ranged commanders

To display differences between versions, select one or more edits in the list using checkboxes and click "diff selected"
Post edit history
Date Editor Before After
12/11/2022 3:28:49 PMCZrankpsaniac before revert after revert
Before After
1 I might have overdone the mockery, sorry @GoogleFrog. 1 I might have overdone the mockery, sorry @GoogleFrog, I apologize.
2 [q]I'm claiming that commanders are poorly designed more than that they are OP.[/q] 2 [q]I'm claiming that commanders are poorly designed more than that they are OP.[/q]
3 Sorry, but you claimed that long-range commanders are "reasonably effective". I think we can all agree that commanders are poorly designed. But long-range coms are just noob traps. They always were. (for the last 5 years at least) 3 Sorry, but you claimed that long-range commanders are "reasonably effective". I think we can all agree that commanders are poorly designed. But long-range coms are just noob traps. They always were. (for the last 5 years at least)
4 \n 4 \n
5 The way I see this, considering the way you are interpreting the data you made, you are approaching this from such a wrong angle that you are bound to come to wrong conclusions. Sure, a com redesign could be good, but focusing on the "long range beam commander" as the prime commander issue? Why? Nobody uses it! Dante has a similar design and that's mostly fine. 5 The way I see this, considering the way you are interpreting the data you made, you are approaching this from such a wrong angle that you are bound to come to wrong conclusions. Sure, a com redesign could be good, but focusing on the "long range beam commander" as the prime commander issue? Why? Nobody uses it! Dante has a similar design and that's mostly fine.