• Home
  • Index
  • Search
  • Download
  • Server Rules
  • House Roleplay Laws
  • Player Utilities
  • Player Help
  • Forum Utilities
  • Returning Player?
  • Toggle Sidebar
Interactive Nav-Map
Tutorials
New Wiki
ID reference
Restart reference
Players Online
Player Activity
Faction Activity
Player Base Status
Discord Help Channel
DarkStat
Server public configs
POB Administration
Missing Powerplant
Stuck in Connecticut
Account Banned
Lost Ship/Account
POB Restoration
Disconnected
Member List
Forum Stats
Show Team
View New Posts
View Today's Posts
Calendar
Help
Archive Mode




Hi there Guest,  
Existing user?   Sign in    Create account
Login
Username:
Password: Lost Password?
 
  Discovery Gaming Community Discovery Development Discovery Mod General Discussion Discovery Mod Balance
« Previous 1 … 42 43 44 45 46 … 55 Next »
Fighter Explosives (missiles + torps and mines) Poll

Server Time (24h)

Players Online

Active Events - Scoreboard

Latest activity

Poll: Should damage done by explosives be increased? (note that vanilla and equipment vulnerability is removed)
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
Yes
68.68%
125 68.68%
No
31.32%
57 31.32%
Total 182 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Pages (17): « Previous 1 … 11 12 13 14 15 … 17 Next »
Fighter Explosives (missiles + torps and mines) Poll
Offline Jamez
01-26-2009, 01:52 PM, (This post was last modified: 01-26-2009, 01:53 PM by Jamez.)
#121
Member
Posts: 1,571
Threads: 80
Joined: Feb 2006

Not quite sure what all the spam is about...

Quote:Should damage done by explosives be increased? (note that vanilla and equipment vulnerability is removed)

Yes [ 93 ]

No [ 41 ]
Speaks for itself.

The other question(Should usage of multiple explosives at once be limited?) is not so easy to tell, this in my eyes means none of the 'limiting' options are ready to be implemented.

Instead of posting crap, how about giving suggestions.

Andrew Skye
Starflier thrill-seeker

Evangeline Knight
Seasoned fighter pilot

Shinji Takeda
Renzu Corp ex-COO
  Reply  
Offline mjolnir
01-26-2009, 01:56 PM,
#122
Member
Posts: 3,774
Threads: 71
Joined: Sep 2007

My suggestions was to say yes to increased damage (obviously)

and run the 2nd part of the poll again with the 3 options that got most votes....

to some this is "being sore looser", oh well.

[Image: sigiw102.jpg]
Igiss says: Martin, you give them a finger, they bite off your arm.
Reply  
Offline Baltar
01-26-2009, 01:57 PM,
#123
Member
Posts: 1,621
Threads: 28
Joined: Jan 2008

No limit should be in place for how much you can fire. But ... the cargo that is dropped would be less. For instance ... if you are a mine/torpedo/missile spammer, you'd receive zero cargo from your opponent since you would have destroyed not only the ship but all cargo aboard.
  Reply  
Offline Tomtomrawr
01-26-2009, 02:04 PM,
#124
Guardian of the Void
Posts: 3,224
Threads: 242
Joined: Nov 2007

I need missiles to survive, i suggest they just get the damage increase, and no other changes.

[17:45:39] Wolfs Ghost (Murphy): Tom, you have problems. Go kill yourself.
[19:25:12] Johnny (Jam): Tomtom, I will beat you with a spoon.
[14:22:56] Prarabdh Thakur: KILL HIM WITH A SHEEP.
[17:40:48] Eagle (Junes): Tom should be slapped with a spoon.
[11:32:18] Warspite: Thank you for being so awesome Tom. <3
[18:17:36] Metano: I love you tomtom
[20:06:24] Warspite: I will seriously give you epic head.
' Wrote:Edit: also, Tomtomrawr, fappin' like a boss.
Reply  
Offline swift
01-26-2009, 02:08 PM,
#125
Member
Posts: 2,838
Threads: 61
Joined: Jul 2008

I am not the only one who fails to see an argument there Shep.

But anyways, the dev team will do what the dev team wants.

I predict increased damage for nukes, missiles, and torps, emphasis on nukes, and cargo limitations. And I know I am probably right.

<span style="font-familyTonguealatino Linotype">
<span style="color:#000000">All morons hate it when you call them a moron.
</span></span>
<span style="color:#33FFFF">The CFF</span>
<span style="color:#33FF33">CFF Communication Channel and RP Collection</span>
  Reply  
Offline Baltar
01-26-2009, 02:10 PM, (This post was last modified: 01-26-2009, 02:10 PM by Baltar.)
#126
Member
Posts: 1,621
Threads: 28
Joined: Jan 2008

Absolutely ... nukes should have more punch. They should have far more effect than a bomber's supernova.
  Reply  
Offline swift
01-26-2009, 02:12 PM,
#127
Member
Posts: 2,838
Threads: 61
Joined: Jul 2008

' Wrote:Absolutely ... nukes should have more punch. They should have far more effect than a bomber's supernova.

D:

Not really, but yes more than a normal torpedo anyways. -Nuclear- mine, one o' those should tear through any fighter hull.
But yes, balance, I am perfectly aware of it. Anyways I agree with what the dev team plans to do..

<span style="font-familyTonguealatino Linotype">
<span style="color:#000000">All morons hate it when you call them a moron.
</span></span>
<span style="color:#33FFFF">The CFF</span>
<span style="color:#33FF33">CFF Communication Channel and RP Collection</span>
  Reply  
Offline chopper
01-26-2009, 05:55 PM, (This post was last modified: 01-26-2009, 06:07 PM by chopper.)
#128
Member
Posts: 2,476
Threads: 31
Joined: Oct 2007

Sorry to intrude again, since I'm probably not well informed about the situation.
I just want to comment on one remark.

Quote:oh so, your logic tells us mjolnir .... if there were 3 people running for president 1 got 1 million votes, the other got 1 million and 1 votes and the other 1 million 500 votes.... that the one with 1 million 500 votes should be like oh hell no... why? cause the other 2 peoples votes accumulated upto more thats why.

I live in a country where multiple candidates run for president.
If one won 1.5 million and say 37%, the other one 1.4 mil and about 35% and the third got 1 mil and about 28%.. Guess what would happen?
First two guys would go in the second round, where people would vote for one of those.
So yeah, his logic is actually quite fine. More then fine, if I might add.

If you have 35% for a NO side, and 35 + 20 for yes (just different solutions) - voters should get another vote where they would just vote for YES or NO.
And if YES won, the choice which got most votes would be implemented. Or if you want to make it even more complicated, two choices (from YES side) would be put in another (third vote) to chose between two choices with most votes again.
Why is this fair? Well, you can have one conservative idea (candidate) which won, say, 37%. And on the other side you can have 2 liberal candidates with 35+28%.
So, you are giving your voters another chance to merge their votes.
In my country conservative candidate always gets the most votes in the first row, but looses badly in the second one - because of the merging liberal votes.
And that is democracy, short and simple.

Presidential elections were a bad example, as most countries do work as I described.
If you have 3+ candidates you will always have a second row, unless someone won 50% + 1 vote in the first one.
And this is not the case now.

On another note.. Are you, arguing guys (silent, lohingren... I know Mjolnir is), registered on developer forum?
If yes, why are you arguing in public? What's the point?
I mean, yeah, sometimes you can convince the crowd to rape one guy and make him do otherwise. But this just looks silly.
And it should be forbidden.
If not, ignore the upper.

Quote:My suggestions was to say yes to increased damage (obviously)

and run the 2nd part of the poll again with the 3 options that got most votes....

to some this is "being sore looser", oh well.

I think my way is better, since you can end up with yet another vote if you put 3 again. Put just yes/no and then another vote if yes wins.
In that new vote you can put even 3 (though I'd go with two).
I mean, your way is maybe more democratic, but it's way too time consuming.
Yes/No = saves time if "No" wins. Gets you trough if "Yes" wins and you are already one step closer to your goal.
In your way you can end up with 40% for no, 30 for one yes and 30 for another, and then you are stuck again.



And no, I am not defending anyone, I just wanted to clarify that little thingy as I feel that I am qualified for such a thing, as a student of political science.
Now do as you wish:P

My votes are still :

1. Yes
2. Yes, by reducing their refire rate.

Luvyaall!

Lucendez Wrote:
It is every Corsair's responsibility to die a beautiful death in defense of Crete, regardless of how OORP or how capwhoring the opposition is. Launch your fighter, joust the battlecruisers and die a beautiful death. Then, drink it down in the bar.

Can't let you bash folks in your sig Chopper-Del
  Reply  
Offline SilentAssassin82
01-26-2009, 06:46 PM,
#129
Member
Posts: 282
Threads: 9
Joined: May 2008

I quite simply have only one thing realy to say about that Chopper bud. You are probably not well informed about the situation. And im not going to go on about it here because it will just yield the same results. All i will say is theres a devolopers chat on skype. And Mjolnir says the exact same thing if you want somthing changed then post it in the Dev forum. But theres plenty of things desided in the Dev chat on skype. But its only things that suite certain people. We could go from forum to forum chat to chat. It it will all result in the same thing. And the fact being you still are arguing with the same people wether its here, in the dev forum or chat.

[Image: Ani-sig.gif]
Reply  
Offline Primus Avatar
01-26-2009, 07:08 PM,
#130
Member
Posts: 1,046
Threads: 52
Joined: May 2008

the things you changed till now are good. No further changes needed, thank you!

wassup
  Reply  
Pages (17): « Previous 1 … 11 12 13 14 15 … 17 Next »


  • View a Printable Version
  • Subscribe to this thread


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)



Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2026 MyBB Group. Theme © 2014 iAndrew & DiscoveryGC
  • Contact Us
  •  Lite mode
Linear Mode
Threaded Mode