Command and Conquer: Renegade Official Forums: Tactics and Strategies » The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps

Home » Renegade Discussions » Tactics and Strategies » The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps

Show: Today's Messages :: Polls :: Message Navigator

The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps [message #-979311]

Thu, 07 March 2002 08:22

Anonymous

exactly! gdi stuff is not fancy but it is very effective if used properly. it actually takes more teamwork to properly coordinate the nod forces. having a stealth tank for instance takes patience and cunning, don't try to sit and go toe to to with mediums and mammoths. it also takes a map that has room to manuever in order for the stealth to have any chance at all. some maps don't have that and buying a stealth is a waste of money on those maps..

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps By: Anonymous on Thu, 07 March 2002 00:01
		The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps By: Anonymous on Thu, 07 March 2002 00:08
		The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps By: Anonymous on Thu, 07 March 2002 00:11
		The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps By: Anonymous on Thu, 07 March 2002 00:37
		The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps By: Anonymous on Thu, 07 March 2002 01:08
		The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps By: Anonymous on Thu, 07 March 2002 01:17
		The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps By: Anonymous on Thu, 07 March 2002 02:04
		The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps By: Anonymous on Thu, 07 March 2002 04:02
		The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps By: Anonymous on Thu, 07 March 2002 04:15
		The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps By: Anonymous on Thu, 07 March 2002 06:20
		The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps By: Anonymous on Thu, 07 March 2002 06:55
		The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps By: Anonymous on Thu, 07 March 2002 07:17
		The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps By: Anonymous on Thu, 07 March 2002 07:23
		The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps By: Anonymous on Thu, 07 March 2002 08:22
		The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps By: Anonymous on Thu, 07 March 2002 08:25
		The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps By: Anonymous on Thu, 07 March 2002 08:53
		The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps By: Anonymous on Thu, 07 March 2002 08:59
		The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps By: Anonymous on Thu, 07 March 2002 10:39
		The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps By: Anonymous on Thu, 07 March 2002 21:58
		The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps By: Anonymous on Fri, 08 March 2002 06:16
		The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps By: Anonymous on Fri, 08 March 2002 06:20
		The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps By: Anonymous on Fri, 08 March 2002 07:53
		The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps By: Anonymous on Fri, 08 March 2002 10:16
		The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps By: Anonymous on Fri, 08 March 2002 11:37
		The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps By: Anonymous on Fri, 08 March 2002 11:45
		The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps By: Anonymous on Fri, 08 March 2002 12:11
		The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps By: Anonymous on Sun, 10 March 2002 23:09
		The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps By: Anonymous on Mon, 11 March 2002 00:21
		The **** flame tank is to strong on no base defences maps By: Anonymous on Mon, 11 March 2002 04:25

Previous Topic:	Cheap trick
Next Topic:	Mammoths and Weapons

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Fri Feb 14 22:10:16 MST 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00982 seconds