| 1 |
@dyth68
|
1 |
@dyth68
|
| 2 |
[q]This seems like it doesn't solve the issues you list.[/q]
|
2 |
[q]This seems like it doesn't solve the issues you list.[/q]
|
| 3 |
True. I don't see this as a solution but more as an exploration of the space of things possible, specifically in the direction of making large-area tactical cloak significantly different from small-area strategic cloak.
|
3 |
True. I don't see this as a solution but more as an exploration of the space of things possible, specifically in the direction of making large-area tactical cloak significantly different from small-area strategic cloak.
|
| 4 |
\n
|
4 |
\n
|
| 5 |
Flat out removing Iris, Cornea, and Commander Area Cloak (with some consequent buffs to alternate anti-shield strategies, or nerfs to shield spam) so far remains my favorite solution, but i think that few would agree.
|
5 |
Flat out removing Iris, Cornea, and Commander Area Cloak (with some consequent buffs to alternate anti-shield strategies, or nerfs to shield spam) so far remains my favorite solution, but i think that few would agree.
|
| 6 |
\n
|
6 |
\n
|
| 7 |
@Jhopmemes:
|
7 |
@Jhopmemes:
|
| 8 |
[q]And with the "it isn't fun to spectate" argument, nobody cares. If we nerfed or buffed things to make them more fun to watch, unit balance would be thrown out the window.[/q]
|
8 |
[q]And with the "it isn't fun to spectate" argument, nobody cares. If we nerfed or buffed things to make them more fun to watch, unit balance would be thrown out the window.[/q]
|
| 9 |
There is in fact a design goal for this game called "rule of cool". It's for example why Lance can skewer half a dozen raiders, something outside of its antiheavy artillery role: it's just cool for a powerful laser to do that.
|
9 |
There is in fact a design goal for this game called "rule of cool". It's for example why Lance can skewer half a dozen raiders, something outside of its antiheavy artillery role: it's just cool for a powerful laser to do that.
|
| 10 |
\n
|
10 |
\n
|
| 11 |
I am somewhat sad ZK haven't made a rule of beautiful or something like that.
|
11 |
I am somewhat sad ZK haven't made a rule of beautiful or something like that.
|
| 12 |
\n
|
12 |
\n
|
| 13 |
[q]Trying to nerf something because you find annoying to be faced against is just plain dumb[/q]
|
13 |
[q]Trying to nerf something because you find annoying to be faced against is just plain dumb[/q]
|
| 14 |
I find it unpleasant to play with, play against, and spectate, compared to a counterfactual in which it does not exist.
|
14 |
I find it unpleasant to play with, play against, and spectate, compared to a counterfactual in which it does not exist.
|
| 15 |
\n
|
15 |
\n
|
| 16 |
I find it actually [i]more[/i] annoying when i am forced to transition to cloaked snitch because it's the only practical counter to shieldballs, than when i get blown up by cloak snitch. I really wish there was something that worked besides this silly trick.
|
16 |
I find it actually [i]more[/i] annoying when i am forced to transition to cloaked snitch because it's the only practical counter to shieldballs, than when i get blown up by cloak snitch. I really wish there was something that worked besides this silly trick.
|
| 17 |
\n
|
17 |
\n
|
| 18 |
[q]However, I do not believe that doing anything that doesn't allow or makes it harder for the cloaker to do its job should be done, such as increasing the decloak time or decreasing area cloaking's range. Instead, I think that making every unit in the area cloak's radius pay for it's cloak in energy would work[/q]
|
18 |
[q]However, I do not believe that doing anything that doesn't allow or makes it harder for the cloaker to do its job should be done, such as increasing the decloak time or decreasing area cloaking's range. Instead, I think that making every unit in the area cloak's radius pay for it's cloak in energy would work[/q]
|
| 19 |
This
seems
to
be
the
solution
that
most
commenters
in
this
thread
gravitate
to.
However,
it's
likely
unfun
to
play
with
(
"numbery",
as
@GoogleFrog
puts
above)
.
|
19 |
This
seems
to
be
the
solution
that
most
commenters
in
this
thread
gravitate
to.
However,
it's
likely
unfun
to
play
with
-
"numbery",
as
@GoogleFrog
puts
above.
|
| 20 |
\n
|
20 |
\n
|
| 21 |
---
|
21 |
---
|
| 22 |
\n
|
22 |
\n
|
| 23 |
Here's an alternative giga-nerf idea: any projectile landing within the cloaker's radius decloaks every unit in that cloaker's field. This makes tactical cloak extremely easy to defeat (just point a Sling or Impaler inside the static cloaker's area) while perhaps not entirely useless (if you can kill the source of projectiles), and doesn't touch strategic cloak at all (because decloaking one unit in the strategic sneak ball already betrays the whole strategy). It possibly even leaves cloak snitch usable, albeit less reliably.
|
23 |
Here's an alternative giga-nerf idea: any projectile landing within the cloaker's radius decloaks every unit in that cloaker's field. This makes tactical cloak extremely easy to defeat (just point a Sling or Impaler inside the static cloaker's area) while perhaps not entirely useless (if you can kill the source of projectiles), and doesn't touch strategic cloak at all (because decloaking one unit in the strategic sneak ball already betrays the whole strategy). It possibly even leaves cloak snitch usable, albeit less reliably.
|
Opinion: Being able to see the enemy is "cool"