(01-25-2019, 05:50 AM)diamond1 Wrote: Snacs need fixing. Not cruise disruptors.
That's really, really not the topic at hand.
Relation to topic :
Core game mechanic -> changes to core game mechanic -> adverse and very poor outcome -> another attempt to change a core mechanic -> fear of unwanted change that is, history repeating itself -> Snac references -> validated.
Your point good sir?
Cheers
You can talk about the SNAC in a SNAC thread. If you're going to respond to every balance suggestion you don't like with "nope, you'll break it, history repeating itself", what's the point? Make a poll or post in flood if you're not interested in discussing anything.
(01-25-2019, 06:16 AM)Greylock97 Wrote:
(01-25-2019, 05:35 AM)Grumblesaur Wrote: This seems like more a matter of opinion than the rest of your post. And also playstyle -- I don't know that I've ever run out of CDs, even in a long fleet fight.
See the clusterfu** that was the final battle between CR and OCs in Tau-29. Some of our bombers ran out of CDs. That kind of situation is where a lower CD count would be a complete disaster. As it was, we were outnumbered cap wise. Sure, we won anyway. If nobody had CDs left, it would have ended a lot quicker for the Outcasts.
Why exactly is this specific instance of Outcasts triumphing over CR in spite of poor resource management relevant? Why shouldn't it have ended quicker for the Outcasts? A disaster for one side is a victory for the other. If you reversed the sides it would be the exact same non-argument as this.
A way a lone a last a loved a long the riverrun, past Eve and Adam's, from swerve of shore to bend of bay,
brings us by a commodius vicus of recirculation back to Howth Castle and Environs.
