Latios418
|
|
« on: June 05, 2009, 12:21:40 am » |
|
to make it so that retreating units phase through tanks? This addresses two concerns, one being minor and one being major:
1. The minor concern: Since they retreat to the same place your stuff comes from, and often when you retreat it's because of losses so you would be calling in replacements, it can fuck up pathing of incoming vehicles. They have to slowly turn around, move forward, and turn back around, losing the burst of speed they had on the road.
2. The major concern: Using it for griefing. In my last match, I had a three-man 75% hp vet 1 oversupplied Fallschirmjager squad. I had a Marder supporting them, which was killed by a Sherman that rushed it. However, right as it died, it fired off a shot destroying main gun on the sherman. One squad ran away from it while I waited for AT reinforcements to come in. The second squad was not so lucky. The sherman was moving back and forth, making it so they couldn't fucking move anywhere because of the precedence of vehicle pathing over infantry pathing. Two guys got crushed. Ok, that's not the balance issue. What is the balance issue is the fact that I tried to retreat my Falls after it was down to one man. The motherfucking Sherman kept moving back and forth, keeping my Falls in place while some rangers came and killed it, costing me fucking 6pp. On top of it, the dick claimed he was a good sport, and he was only doing it for the exp (yeah, if you're a good sport you don't choose your own 2 fucking xp over your opponent's 6pp).
Anyways, large rant. I can't think of a reason not to include it if it's possible to do it. It's very annoying just to fuck up your vehicle pathing, and what happened in that game had me so pissed off, but I digress. It does not contribute to gameplay whatsoever. It's not really a hit on realism, considering retreating units don't get crushed despite running into a tank that's going full speed towards so this isn't any less realistic than what's already there. On top of this, even if you did think that was realistic realism < gameplay and it's not like we're replacing the Pershing with an M1 Abrams, but rather a miniscule hit on realism for the sake of getting rid of an annoying bit of gameplay.
|
