I would like to make the following suggestions: 1: It seems that commanders (took altogether) are pretty much able to equip themselves with any type of weapon: beam laser, disintegrator, shotgun, ... and even drones. I just don't understand why the commander doesn't have the possibility to equip with a Newton gravity arm(s)? In my opinion, this would open the game to extremely fun and interesting possibilities and ideas. We already have the possibility to create a "funnel web commander", so why not a "jugglenaut type" commander? If this is not possible, could any of the devlobsters explain to me why? 2: Why are commanders "useless" under water? Wouldn't be fair to make them able to eventually defend themselves underwater? If we follow the mechanics of the game, I don't see why commander are completely defenseless underwater. Could anyone explain the logic behind it? Those suggestions don't need to apply to all type of commanders and a smart way to harmonize weapon possibilities for each commander could be found with the open-mindedness of our dear devlobsters. Thanks!
+2 / -0
|
A long time ago, sea was a diferent game. before claymore, before anphibious water regen, before beamlazer archer, and before seawold slow torpedo, sea was crazy. we had a sniper submarine, ans scallops had normal longer ranged torpedos. And there ws the torpedocom. The torpedo com was one of the 2 viable underwater coms, that were necessary. Torpedocom had more range than the snipersub, which had a lot of range, and always upgraded to area shield. Se was won by skirmishing seacoms and scallop armies that could be matches only wth another scallop army. There was rez com too, that resed scallop armies. scallop, torpedo, long range, underwater, boring. All of that was removed into super short ranged torpedos and the current nonsense of sea today. I don't think we will get sea com ever again.
+5 / -0
|
A module to allows comm to float to fire, like buoys, could be interesting.
+2 / -0
|
|
|
Flea's pew-pew for commander!
+0 / -0
|
Yes, and a freaking jetpack to allow the commander to FLY would be amazing! Some people are joking around but if you think about it, the very logic of an upgradable commander should mean that anything should be possible to do with it. Some people would have laughed at the idea of a "funnel web" comm and still it actually exists. So why all those limitations? Don't you imagine the orgasmic fun with such commanders on Trololo? And what about comm oriented players such as    raaar (taking a top 10 player on purpose) in 1V1? Zero-K is meant to be fun and I believe the growing community of crustaceans would enjoy such improvements to be discussed.
+1 / -0
|
I would like to see a comeback of underwater Gauss cannon for com.
+1 / -0
|
I realize it's a bit of a digression from where the discussion has gone, but I personally would like to see a version of the Phantom's sniper gun for the Commander. It shouldn't have the same fire-while-cloaked ability, certainly. I'd like for my commander to be able to take a couple pot-shots at a battle without having to walk into knife range first, or to try and pick off isolated turrets.
+0 / -0
|
  Renthrak The Phantom's Sniper is already available for the Engineer commander if I'm not mistaken. Also, you could literally have a Phantom comm by adding the cloaking option to your commander.
+0 / -0
|
quote:
I realize it's a bit of a digression from where the discussion has gone, but I personally would like to see a version of the Phantom's sniper gun for the Commander. It shouldn't have the same fire-while-cloaked ability, certainly.
I'd like for my commander to be able to take a couple pot-shots at a battle without having to walk into knife range first, or to try and pick off isolated turrets. |
Renthrak It already existed. Its called Shock Rifle. But u need Light Particle Beem upgrade first.
+0 / -0
|
I'd like more variety of weapons for commanders. Also better balance between the ones that we already have (this is a recurrent conversation) In my opinion, it's obvious that commanders could have a weapon that fires underwater. It all depends on its power level. Power level depends on range, burst, efficiency (how likely it is to hit moving targets), aoe and dps. Assuming existing level2 commander weapons have the same power level because they cost the same (they trade some attributes for others). Should weapons that can be fired underwater and hit underwater targets have the same power level as the other commander weapons or less? what if they can only be fired underwater?
+0 / -0
|
There have been quite a few times when i wished i could swap my com's legs for a spider chassis.
+0 / -0
|
|
|
|
|
Gravity gun would be useless versus some things, such as statics, and very occasionally insanely strong versus others. This would make the early game with these weapons potentially quite lopsided and inconsistent. It could be possible though, I suppose, if it's mostly focused on killing raiders (Which is what the Comm really needs to do). There is no underwater anti-heavy weaponry, almost all underwater firing units are raiders. There would be no way to deal with torpedo comms. Now, why the disintegrator can fire from underwater, well, I don't know...
+1 / -0
|
> asks what GF's opinion on a question is > gets told (based on my memory of the last time this was discussed) > downvotes answer ok bro, I guess that's what I get for being nice to you. I will remember for next time. (The other half of the argument is that there isn't a range where a commander torpedo would behave reasonably both before and after 8x targeting system modules, given that current underwater weapons are generally short range.)
+0 / -0
|
you're reasoning in absolutes, and it's flawed. if someone has a skirmishy commander with the underwater weapon and range mods, it's particularly vulnerable to being rushed by hunters and subs, which have slow weapons burst and good dps/cost. if it has a sizable escort of other underwater units, then someone had to pay for both things. you're assuming riot+skirmisher mixes HAVE to be countered by other skirmishers (which there are none atm underwater), that's not the case, they can get overrun by a mob of fast units, which is what often happens to surface commander skirmishers : they get overrun by fast, short range, high dps units, or scouted by owls and bombed, even if there's noone with grizzly or lance nearby. thunderbird might also work vs underwater targets (not sure). note that even surface assaults like halberds and such can tank for the other anti-sub units. either way you can adjust the weapon strengths. Relatively weak weapon compared to the surface options is better than no weapon.
+0 / -0
|
Well, if you're going to play to the crowd and repeat the arguments you already made by PM, I'll repost my answers too: quote:
if someone has a skirmishy commander with the underwater weapon and range mods, it's particularly vulnerable to being rushed by hunters and subs, which have slow weapons burst and good dps/cost. |
quote:
you're assuming riot+skirmisher mixes HAVE to be countered by other skirmishers (which there are none atm underwater), that's not the case, they can get overrun by a mob of fast units, which is what often happens to surface commander skirmishers : they get overrun by fast, short range, high dps units, or scouted by owls and bombed, even if there's noone with grizzly or lance nearby. |
This didn't do the much flimsier and less manouverable Serpent, or the skirmisher Scallop, any good in terms of being desirable design. Being a singular unhealthy unit didn't help the artycom either. quote:
if it has a sizable escort of other underwater units, then someone had to pay for both things. |
Somebody has to pay for *everything*. This isn't an argument at all in as of itself. quote:
either way you can adjust the weapon strengths. Relatively weak weapon compared to the surface options is better than no weapon. |
I don't see significant worth in adding a torpedo weapon that is owled for all non-degenerate usecases.
+0 / -0
|
