Building underground?

ok i see how that is misinterpreted, i have been supplying bad things cause they said "can you get some bad reasons" and i tried, also just because everyone says im wrong doesn't mean i cant try. also everyone is trying to claim me wrong mostly be saying i have terrible sentence structure (which is kinda true but hey i'm terrible at english sentences (but it's weird... i was raised in english)). and by cliche i said this, it's because who has made a RTS game with underground layers? i can't name one so i think some people don't like it cause they'd have to change their style

also i've kinda dropped some of those terrible reasons so only my like 3 recent posts are my current idea's

In a 40 player game, you fight for your limited resources like most RTS games.

Underwater is not the same as underground, and even then we have no confirmation of underwater as even being more then a layer where subs are.

Having underground walls that are indestructible? This is not a tower defence game, there would never be such a thing that an engineer can build that cannot be destroyed.
So no, it is exactly the same as the rest of the land, making it pointless.

"and you are just pushing my argument away and not supporting a reason that tells a real downside to underground cause"

And you have yet to provide a real upside of worth, so you are just ignoring everybody's posts and points.

And if you feel like the game will be cliché by having the same land air and navy, then an underground layer will CHANGE NOTHING.


This idea provides no upsides that are not utterly pointless to standard game play or towards just promoting a standard turtling frame of mind by sitting cramp up but still getting the same resources and by having near impregnable defences that cannot be broken by the same means that they were created.

You are giving a bad name to turtling players with an idea like this by providing a way to sit back and play the game lazily without ever having a reason to expand and fight with a mobile army, no territory control, no force management, no strategic plaining, just wall up and tech to the end game weapons with resources that should not be available to the style of play you are inciting, and with defences that are unable to be assaulted and broken.

This idea of wrong on enough levels for me to simply lament the very idea that this would be a good idea.

This is the reason why people hate turtling in RTS games, because of crap like this, and I can't say I blame them.

NO TO UNDERGROUND BASES.

I believe he meant indestructible walls to be a terrain feature.

But yes also all your other points. although Kmike13 might have been brash he did have a point that our actual arguments are seldom addressed and our subjective statements are always rebuked.

now you're just bringing back the idea's i said i don't want anymore... and i have not disregarded the arguments to my posts it's just that we all keep repeating ourselves. so now im going to set it straight, first of all a transparent ocean will not hide me, a underground base will. did you ever consider the possibilities of it or just look at my idea's? what new units can come into this that have never been thought of, maybe a units that can camoflauge, or maybe a unit that can walk on any surface. secret covert operations. etc. Also when you say i've disregarded you you are totally being hypocritical because you just blow off my idea's without elaborating on how it could be better, when you write and argument you are supposed to show the pro's and con's to your idea.

we do... constantly. would you like me to get you quotes?

well remember i said i dropped those and am now using some different reasons and that doesn't make it better that you agreed lol... it makes me feel all alone in a topic where a great idea can be born (if some people had common sense)

I'm amazed that this thread is still alive. Yogurt, please retrieve those quotes... This is downright embarrassing.

I think the poll has said enough and I doubt that Uber even cares about this thread.

But being able to hide is an argument in itself. It can also be solve by cloakin fields. Also underwater units are hidden. Yogurt please get the quotes...

Your all alone because no one else thinks its a good idea

really? when i say i dropped those i disclaim old quotes.... now i will change this thread into how underground will make everyone happy (and by that i mean not saying "NO UNDERGROUND") (and yes it is sad cause i am shameless when something good is at stake)

oh and kmike i have had ppl agree with me

I feel it is my deuty to address his idea in a calm considerate manner. he obviously cares for it a lot and doesn't understand why it would detract from this game. You shall have your quotes.

And this would be a great idea... but not in this game, it needs the entirity of a game to be built around this core principle of the underground, i would then proabably have a toxic surface that you had to venture into to wage your war. It would be a fantastic total conversion if implimented correctly. But it has no place in PA.

well i have decided i want the underground badly enough i will try to get it to work for everyone and yes i do care... FOR THE TREES (actually the underground but whateva)

Wow, you really want this. Again, you should go play Motherload or Metal Fatigue.

Just because you want to hide from fighting by crawling into a hole does not mean the rust of us play the same way. For goodness sake, this should be added just so that we can crawl into your hole and destroy your base from the ground down. :roll:

also in confirmed features thread it says these two things .Underwater base construction and water platforms so that is promising to me cause no RTS game i know of has that so maybe it will have underground

ok i want a good RTS game like PA to contain this because it has everything i want except underground and you broke a forum rule there "don't flame bait"

http://supcom.wikia.com/wiki/HARMS

SupCom: FA did. Not to mention all AA could be built on water.

yes i know about that but in truth its totally different from a platform

I would ave use spoiler tags but could not find. Part of the problem with our misunderstandings is that you never conceed any point, you just ignore it and move on so you never appear to think you are wrong.

k i said dropping old quotes and i want to make this thread make a way that everyone likes the underground idea so if you have nothing to help with this please don't point out what i said wrong, but just consider all possibilities of this that i have not mentioned. also a land base is just as vulnerable as a underground base, this is because you have all 4 sides open to you but when there is one opening that changes

Best of luck to you. You repeat and refine what your original post says. It paints a very different picture.

are you saying that's a good thing cause i don't think i get if its a compliment or a insult