?

What type of WMDs

  1. Super experimentals (think original supcom)

    9 vote(s)
    47.4%
  2. mini experimental, still built by engies, but will just win a battle

    5 vote(s)
    26.3%
  3. normal nukes

    16 vote(s)
    84.2%
  4. Asteroids (duh)

    18 vote(s)
    94.7%
  5. mini wmds (acid bombs and tac missles)

    13 vote(s)
    68.4%
  6. SCUs (not really WMDs but the opposite for building)

    10 vote(s)
    52.6%
  7. environmental weapons with things to trigger them artificially (black holes) and possible auto fire

    9 vote(s)
    47.4%
  8. normal arty

    15 vote(s)
    78.9%
  9. satalites (vision and maybe lasers)

    16 vote(s)
    84.2%
  10. non destructive experimentals (paragon)

    6 vote(s)
    31.6%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. singularity9733

    singularity9733 New Member

    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sorry about the 2nd topic if anyone takes offense to it
    i was looking around and i saw allot of conflicting views so i figured i'd put them all in one place. Keep in mind that i'm not a developer so i don't even know if they have any intention of doing any of the above things. In sup com 2 the experimentals were pathetic but i think they have a place, but in a different capacity, providing valuable abilities firepower and/or range to an army. I think some should be fast because there's more to warfare then who can make the biggest explosion (and that is the way it should be). Also weapons like nukes, asteroids and black holes (please), what should there power be and should there be a counter to all of them and how difficult should it be to counter them? One of the great things about Fa was the scale that you could make, its unique in that its extremely well done. Its a big part of the game and adds awesome dynamics and strategies that make sup com sup com. What is every ones thoughts on their application in PA?
  2. zordon

    zordon Member

    Messages:
    707
    Likes Received:
    2
    Bad poll is bad.
  3. BulletMagnet

    BulletMagnet Post Master General

    Messages:
    3,263
    Likes Received:
    591
    Poll gets better with proper grammar, and paragraphing.

  4. thorneel

    thorneel Member

    Messages:
    367
    Likes Received:
    1
    At the risk of yet again repeating myself, black holes don't work that way! When will people learn? Things won't "spiral into the black hole" anymore that they will "spiral into the Sun", unless you have engines actively pushing against the rotation (and even then, it's easier to put something into a liberation trajectory and hurl into the abyss than making it "spiralling" that way).
    Black holes can have perfectly stable planets or even stars orbiting around then, like any other celestial body. They just happen to be denser than the others, and not emit as much light. If you really want massive triggerable doom events, you have dying stars for that.

    Unless you meant, say, using a gun that creates and uses black holes as ammunition, with all the fun stuff it implies, but that wouldn't really be an "environmental" weapon. Or a singularity generator that creates a black hole if destroyed. Which could be fun, though I don't see what kind of counter it would have.
  5. thapear

    thapear Member

    Messages:
    446
    Likes Received:
    1
    Yup. Again, no "I voted" option.
  6. garatgh

    garatgh Active Member

    Messages:
    805
    Likes Received:
    34
    Whats the point to a poll were some features has allredy been confirmed or denied?


    There will be nukes, there will be astroids, there will be experimentals (Yes it has been confirmed, but dont worry, they have said that there will be few and the game wont revolve around them as much as before, so mini experimentals).

    There wont be super experimentals.


    You would have to give a realy good argumeent and a discussion to make them even consider changing something allredy confirmed, not just a poll.

    Remade this topic:
    viewtopic.php?f=61&t=40792

Share This Page