| Forget the APC rush... (about flying vehicles) [message #-980295] |
Mon, 25 February 2002 08:30  |
|
|
With the release of the Orcas/Apaches/Chinooks coming up in a few weeks how do you think it'll effect certain tactics?  ie A chinook with an orca escort comes in on top of the airstrip, disgorges the engies, and then crashes triumphantly as it's destroyed by 10+ people... [ February 25, 2002: Message edited by: Grimn ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Forget the APC rush... (about flying vehicles) [message #-980291] |
Mon, 25 February 2002 13:00  |
|
|
huh? what?
air vehicles?
what are you all talking about... am i behind? I thought that air vehicles were being left out as they were segmenting the map/flew too high for the map etcwould someone enlighten me to what is going on?
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Forget the APC rush... (about flying vehicles) [message #-980289] |
Mon, 25 February 2002 13:18 |
|
|
|
Imagine a combined APC/Chinook Rush. Two APC's Two Chinooks... then again having 3/4's of the team in those vehicles probably isn't the best idea... Still. The possibilities that *just* the Chinook adds are awesome. Plus the fact you can go on top of buildings on the two aircraft maps. A host of new tricks... Take the Chinook do a quick flyby of an enemy building dropping the airborne engie corps while the the support hits at the same time as the entire base is focusing on the enemy holed up in their building... *ahem* I'll stop ranting. Any other (hypothetical) tricks someone wants to try?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Forget the APC rush... (about flying vehicles) [message #-980283] |
Mon, 25 February 2002 22:49 |
|
|
|
That's why the defence arsenal of the GDI rocks. Just build an advanced guard tower and blow tanks and aircrafts to pieces. As you well know, the Renegade engine supports aircrafts but most graphic cards do not. So my big hope that the air units will be provided shortly, so that the complete arsenal and make the game complete. greetz
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Forget the APC rush... (about flying vehicles) [message #-980278] |
Wed, 27 February 2002 21:13 |
|
|
quote:
ok the air guys are just like buggys k they have the heath as a buggy they move like a buggy and they go as fast as the buggy
where did you get that information Kane123? Like stated before, I believe that the chinook will have much less health compared to the APC, and no weaponery. Plus it will carry 5 people compared to the APCs 6 people. The only downside in my opinion is that they just bounce of buildings etc when crashing.
|
|
|
|
| Forget the APC rush... (about flying vehicles) [message #-980277] |
Wed, 27 February 2002 21:23 |
|
|
|
I'de rather it be able to blow up and cause splash damage when crashing,imagine doing Kamikaze on Nod buildings? Just get a few orca's or something and fly into enemy structures, then... BOOOMMM YOU'RE ALL DEAD!!! HAHAHA. er... wait nevermind.I wouldnt like getting run over by some Jap on a kamikaze mission because i killed him once. Dear god help us all. (btw.. my comment was not meant to be racial and i am not a racist)
|
|
|
|
| Forget the APC rush... (about flying vehicles) [message #-980276] |
Thu, 28 February 2002 17:50 |
|
|
okay kamikaze tactics...
put some nice proxy mines and timed c4 and whatever just it can blow something and then fly right into something = HEHEHE proxy boooooooooooon and you can probobly then ram a obelisk and crash! the proxy'z will detonate before chopper and god knows what will happen! or just drive in a group of infantry, or why not another chopper!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Forget the APC rush... (about flying vehicles) [message #-980273] |
Thu, 28 February 2002 11:43 |
|
|
|
I think if the singleplayer chinooks are a good example, we are in trouble. Those are so fragile a simple chaingun would kill them. I think a tankshot, which equals 2 man pack rockets, which equals 100 (good number) regular bullets should be its health. Also, as it is my computer doesnt like to see anything but the texture outside the vehicles. All jokes aside, its pretty fun to have a tankwar with only decals, burnmarks, and blinking lights to indicate where you are. Im not joking when i say the stealth tanks were easily seen.
tactics wise, i dont think that too many people will opt for a chinook rush. i think, with all things considered, that it should be a lategame extacy, like having a gunner in a chinook taking a harvester down. even better, everyone standing on the ramp, shooting into the fray. Those are the ones that we all love.
|
|
|
|
| Forget the APC rush... (about flying vehicles) [message #-980272] |
Fri, 01 March 2002 09:52 |
|
|
quote:
Like stated before, I believe that the chinook will have much less health compared to the APC, and no weaponery. Plus it will carry 5 people compared to the APCs 6 people.
According to the offical comment I read, the Chinook will carry 1 pilot and 5 passengers, just like the APC. That's 6 people total.
|
|
|
|
| Forget the APC rush... (about flying vehicles) [message #-980271] |
Fri, 01 March 2002 12:12 |
|
|
|
Maybe a system could be arranged so that Orcas are re-armed above the war factory. For nod, they might need even more buildings, or they have a single pad for a single orca on top of their main airstrip building. OR, they could just add helipads and get it over with...
|
|
|
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
)
)
