NathanielStarr Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 (edited) We need more cover not less, because of well GUNSHIPS. Edited February 22, 2014 by NathanielStarr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zharik Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 In short, cartoon character exaggerations of proportion don't have a huge effect on the tactical considerations of pre-/early engagement maneuvering. My point was that you can say that the ships are "faster than an F-22" but since everything is actually relative to the sizes we see and not the ranges that are listed by the numbers. We are in fact going *much* slower than the numbers list... Now to the people that claim this game is slow paced? HUH?!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gronkagin Posted February 23, 2014 Share Posted February 23, 2014 I'd rather see a fight where the asteroids were moving and bumping into each other. Try pitching a tent in that. We actually would see bombers in that fight, though. Holy crap! Yes to the moving asteroids! That would totally make things different. Everything should be in motion, even the satellites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zharik Posted February 23, 2014 Share Posted February 23, 2014 Holy crap! Yes to the moving asteroids! That would totally make things different. Everything should be in motion, even the satellites. They don't know how to program this. Heck they didn't even know how to do it with the rail shooter crap that the PVE crowd is saddled with. (the spinning asteroids are not solid) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gronkagin Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 Necro. But they do need moving asteroids and satellites. It would be awesome, like a 3-D version of PvP Asteroids! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts