PDA

View Full Version : Mech Destroyer / Anti-Air Mobile Merger?


Darth Windu
07-26-2002, 02:22 AM
My idea is to merge the current Anit-Air Mobile (AAM) and mech destroyer into one unit, with the art of the AAM. I came up with this idea after seeing episode 2 where the AAM's destroyed a Republic AT-TE, and also after playing Command & Conquer, where the 'rocket' troops can fire at both air and ground targets, but are ineffective against infantry. Of course, the AAM would have to be make more expensive, but i think it would make the game better. There could also be a new unit that would be a smaller, faster assault mech with less hp's, armour, firepower, cost etc for things like the AT-ST and AAT. The things this idea would do and fix include-

-make the game more canon
-make anti-air mobile's more effective
-remove the problem of when using AAM's in a group, if you tell that group to attack a target, the AAM's will move right next to the target, and normally get destroyed.

Thoughts?

jcb231
07-26-2002, 04:08 AM
I think that the two units should not be fully merged. I like the two seperate units.

I do, however, think that a researchable upgrade for the anti-air mobile for most civs could be an option to attack ground mechs and heavy weapons and perhaps buildings...could be fun, and would, indeed, be more like the movie. After all, that's why the AT AT was given its anti-air upgrade...it was like the movie that way.

I think that anti-air troops should remain anti-air effective only, but could perhaps have a weak laser attack to use so they're not just butchered if caught unprotected.

As a side note, I do think that when you have anti-air of any type in an army it should be "smart" enough to not get close to a ground unit when you order the whole group to atack a ground unit. The anti-air should hang back a bit so as not to get needelessly destroyed, but still be able to cover the army from air assault.
This "hanging back" rule should also apply to medics and workers in an army....the medics should not move in to attack, but rather just go around healing automatically.....workers should just step back and not attack unless you specifically order them individually to do so.

Darth Windu
07-26-2002, 06:21 AM
Well as i said, apart from making it more canon, it would remove the attack problem, and would enhance their capability, plus it has already been shown to work in many other games. Also, the proposed mini-assault mech would be good against everything (except air) but not as good vs infantry as the strike mech, not as good vs mechs as the anti-air/mech destroyer etc. I think this would also make units such as the AT-ST and AAT more canon.

Darth Windu
07-29-2002, 02:27 AM
So no-one else has an opinion on this?

memezcom
07-29-2002, 04:40 AM
I don't see why they should be merged. I think it's part of the attraction of the game that each unit has strengths and weaknesses. It means you always have to have a little think about what combination of units you are going to need when attacking the enemy. Which unit is going to do the attacking? what defence will it need etc...For example, in the later missions of the Republic campaign I liked to use the cruiser but this has no real defence of its own so I used fighters to escort them, but in turn they need protecting by anti-air units who in turn need protecting from enemy ground units....I enjoyed that part of the game, how to combine units to give an effective attack force.
Having a unit with no obvious weak point would unbalance the game unless the enemy also had the equivalent unit...which brings you back to the curent status quo...

Darth Windu
07-29-2002, 05:12 AM
I already stated why they should be merged. Also, this new unit would still be useless against infantry and ships, and would also lose to assault mechs. Besides, the concept has already been proved in the Command & Conquer series.

Kryllith
07-29-2002, 11:18 AM
I also like them as separate units, though I would like something built into the program where units incapable of attacking something wouldn't move up into firing range. It's really annoying when I have a bunch of troopers and a couple medics selected and the medics feel the need to rush the opposing forces.

Kryllith

Darth Windu
07-30-2002, 08:20 AM
I'm pretty sure that the problem with the medics, anti-air etc being able to target units, all ground units being able to target air units, and air cruisers being able to target other air units are the result of the game engine, with it not being designed for these sorts of units.

Kryllith
07-30-2002, 09:18 AM
Yeah, I agree with you there. Mainly it's a problem that LucasArt didn't bother to look into or didn't bother to fix. Sounds like it should be fixable though. They just need to make it so certain units won't attack his an enemy unit is rightclicked on. Heck, I could live with the AA running into battle, at least they are designed to attack, but having things like medics, trawlers, and transports doing it is silly.

Kryllith

Sithmaster_821
07-31-2002, 10:37 AM
This is the apitomy of stupidity. Just because one civs aam blow up one of another civs assault mechs, doesnt mean that it should be merged. The Hellfire unit had surface to suface and surface to air capabilities, and, because it fit best as a AAM, lucasarts designed it that way, slightly tweaking the way it was shown in the movies. I thought that your gunship idea was taking the movies too literally, but im appalled at this idea. Windu, please, for the sake of the entire forum, think before you post

Kryllith
07-31-2002, 11:10 AM
Still in all, there were numerous complaints because the AT-ATs couldn't fire at air units in the original GB, but that was changed in the CC. They could always put a Confed specific upgrade that would allow the Confed AA Artillery to fire at ground units. Though if they did this, I would suggest either limiting what they can fire on (say, only big things like mechs/artillery/cannons but not smaller units like troops) and/or modifying one or more other confed units to aid balance...

Kryllith

simwiz2
07-31-2002, 11:32 AM
AA Mobiles (especially with Retrofit) have enough range that allowing them to attack ground units in even the slightest amount would require MAJOR balance changes and the confederacy would have to lose other units, possibly angering people who like to play that civ.

jcb231
07-31-2002, 01:39 PM
I think that the Confeds should have a civ-specific tech in Tech 4 that allows their AAM to fire on ground mechs, but the range should be shortened considerably. I think that this would not be unbalanced, provided the range was short and the destructive power a little less, it could only fire on Mechs or Cannons or Heavy Weapons or Buildings...not Troops and Jedi and BHs, and the upgrade was very expensive. Walker Research hasn't unbalanced the game yet, and its essentially the reverse of this idea.

Kryllith
07-31-2002, 04:20 PM
Same problem with the AT-ATs though (ie, they have great range). One way to level it a little would to give Confed AA Artillery a minimum distance for attacking ground units (in addition to not letting them attack troopers). Cutting off the max range for ground units wouldn't be bad either. If nothing else, it could be set up so that their AA bonus (don't remember the name, but it's the one certain civs get for having weak air which extends range and damage) doesn't affect ground units. Of course, they wouldn't get splash damage like the AT-ATs, but then the AT-ATs didn't get splash damage in the air anyway.

Kryllith

Darth Windu
08-01-2002, 04:01 AM
Once again sithmaster attacks what s/he doesnt understand...

As i have said before, this concept does, and would, work. Hopefully if and when lucasarts does make a SW:GB 2, they will incorperate this into the game.

Sithmaster_821
08-01-2002, 10:00 PM
Windu, you are trying to do a realism>gameplay, which others have repeatedly told you doesnt work. Merging two perfectly balanced units spells trouble. Either it becomes an uber-unit with the same capabilities as the two units separated. Or if it is toned down for balance's sake, then air/mech will wreck havoc. Listen to what everyone else is saying, it is a more reasonable option. Also, about the next Star Wars RTS, remember the outside-the-box/use-your-own-engine-not-AoK.

Darth Windu
08-02-2002, 08:19 AM
sithmaster - no, im not. This change would be quite succesful, but as i said it would also require a change to the current mech destroyer unit. Although its quite possible that it would take a bit of work to make sure everything is balanced, it would be a good change, and i certainly hope that if there is a sequel, this change is made.

Kryllith
08-02-2002, 09:43 AM
The reason I don't like the idea of implimenting this on a Civ-wide scale is because we end up with the counter-push. If we're going to have AA units that can attack ground, then why not simply give all blaster units the capacity to attack air (as stated in another thread). I think the idea of giving one Civ's AA artillery (in this case the confederacy) an upgrade to attack ground units is a decent idea; it gives the civ some uniqueness without compromising the game as a whole.

I think it's important to keep a distinction between units that are AA and units that are only ground. Every civ already has a unit (in some cases several units) that can attack both air and ground: the fighters. They shouldn't need to have a ground unit that can do both as well. Giving an individual civ the capability to turn a ground based AA unit into a ground attack unit though, wouldn't hurt. It worked for the AT-AT afterall (though reversed).

Kryllith

Crazyus Dogus
08-02-2002, 04:35 PM
Originally posted by Kryllith
Yeah, I agree with you there. Mainly it's a problem that LucasArt didn't bother to look into or didn't bother to fix. Sounds like it should be fixable though. They just need to make it so certain units won't attack his an enemy unit is rightclicked on. Heck, I could live with the AA running into battle, at least they are designed to attack, but having things like medics, trawlers, and transports doing it is silly.

Kryllith


Yeah I hate it when medics rush into a firefight. U can theoretically stop this, but it requers lots of micromanagement

Sithmaster_821
08-02-2002, 09:03 PM
Merging the two is just plain dumb. What happens to the AAT, the ATST, or the Homing Spider Droid? Why not give the confeds a walker research like tech that allows them to fire at the ground. That would, unlike any of your previous ideas, enhance gameplay by making the incredibily lacking confeds have a specialty, and making the Hailfire droid feared at an ATAT level. Also, remember what I said about the next RTS not using the same units from SWGB. Think outside the box and listen to others before obliviously posting your senseless babble.

Darth Windu
08-03-2002, 01:33 AM
Originally posted by Sithmaster_821
Merging the two is just plain dumb. What happens to the AAT, the ATST, or the Homing Spider Droid?

Read my first post to see what would happaen to the AAT and AT-ST. Also sithmaster, the babble queen, the sort of unit i am proposing would work with any sort of ground-based RTS, as it has in many different games.

Sithmaster_821
08-04-2002, 08:30 PM
Windu, you fail to see the idiocy in your own ideas. If the two were combined, one of two options would happen:
1. The unit strength in killing mechs and air stay the same, thus creating a uber unit (it takes 5 fu repeaters to kill 1 fu mech destroyer).
2. The unit is cut down for balance purposes and mechs/air rein supreme because their main couter is now weaker than before.

Also, the merger itself lacks sense. Just because one civs unit destroyed one of the other civs unit, it should specilize in killing them. The Hailfire droid's main purpose was to attack the gunships, of which they killed three. By your logic, fighters should specilize against aa mobiles, troops against mechs, and artillery versus anything. Its flawed logic, plain and simple.
the babble queen
Who spams the boards again? Not me. I have reason behind my insults. Try to do the same.
remove the problem of when using AAM's in a group, if you tell that group to attack a target, the AAM's will move right next to the target, and normally get destroyed
try not attacking ground units.

jcb231
08-04-2002, 08:33 PM
Sithmaster, must you always be so rude in your responses?

Anyway, I think the Anti Air attacking gorund units problem comes from when people have a mixed group that contains ground forces and anti air to protect them........I agree with Windu and other posters that the anti-air in such a group should not move in to attack a ground target as they have no effect on it. Anti Air units should automatically hang back slightly to let the ground units do their work.

Sithmaster_821
08-04-2002, 10:38 PM
Also, with the medics and the aa, dont put them in the same group as your troops/mechs.

memezcom
08-05-2002, 06:04 AM
Yeah, that's how I play the game. I never merge 'defensive' units like aa troopers with 'attack' units such as assault mechs. Invariably, my anit-air defence is always at the 'rear' of my group. I'm also one of those guys who researches all the possible upgrades, so my aa invariably has homing capability, increased range and the ability to take more damage. I also go 'over the top sometimes' on how many aa I have - sometimes upto 25 of them if it looks as if it's going to be 'one of those nightmare missions'. It always makes me laugh when you get that many aa missiles homing in on an aircraft......:)

Darth Windu
08-05-2002, 08:15 AM
that isnt a solution sithmaster, and why should we have to do more micromanagement because lucasarts stuffed up? Also, you say that we've only seen one civ's AAM's shooting at air and ground. That might have something to do with the fact that we have never seen any other civ's AAM's. For all you know, they might all have the same ability.

As for the troops/mechs/air thing. The current mech destroyers would become a light assault mech that would be less effective, but faster, faster to build and cheaper. I also dont see why the AAM would have to be made less effective, and with the troops, did you see the battle of hoth?

I would suggest that if you want to see my idea's in practice, go and buy the original Command & Conquer. The unit equivalents would be (for GDI)
Assault Mech - Mammoth Tank
Light Assault Mech - Medium Tank
Anti-Air Mobile - Rocket Launcher / MLRS

Kryllith
08-05-2002, 11:02 AM
Originally posted by Sithmaster_821
Also, with the medics and the aa, dont put them in the same group as your troops/mechs.
Yeah, I've taken to doing this now that I've been using hotkeys more to group my units. It's kinda annoying and would be much better if medics/AA just didn't swarm in, but at least it works (requires a bit more micromanaging though).

Kryllith

Kryllith
08-05-2002, 11:13 AM
Originally posted by Darth Windu
that isnt a solution sithmaster, and why should we have to do more micromanagement because lucasarts stuffed up? Also, you say that we've only seen one civ's AAM's shooting at air and ground. That might have something to do with the fact that we have never seen any other civ's AAM's. For all you know, they might all have the same ability.

But by the same token, we didn't see the Republic Assault Mechs (least, not that I remember) nor the Trade Federation Assault Mechs attack air, though it's quite possible they have the ability. Yet, even if they DO have the ability, only the AT-ATs have the upgrade in the game (unless one plays "all techs").

Kryllith

Sithmaster_821
08-05-2002, 05:22 PM
Well said kryllith.

Windu, its only more micro for those who dont know how to group units using a type/speed grouping, which has other benefits. Use your brain and dont attack units that you cant attack with that specific group. If you want your aa or medics to go with your troops, put them in a separate group and place them on the follow command. Only newbs glob all of their units into one group.

Darth Windu
08-06-2002, 06:17 AM
This is another problem with the game, the amount of micromanagement. Why should i have to put my AAM's on follow instead of grouping them? I can't think of any other RTS i have played that has the same problem with units such as medics, AAM's etc. However i still think the game would benefit from a merger of the AAM and mech destroyer.

Sithmaster_821
08-06-2002, 05:19 PM
The benefits of grouping by type and by speed allows one to effectively counter or assault enemy forces. It also decreases the micro of having to individually target the aa on air, the mechs on troops, and the medics on healing. Doing that, along with a good econ/tech level times and learning the hotkeys, is instrumental in becoming a good player.
i still think the game would benefit from a merger of the AAM and mech destroyer
Aside from helping you beat the comp on easy, how does it make the game better? Please respond intelligently.

simwiz2
08-06-2002, 08:55 PM
Windu, I have a suggestion for you. Don't post for a few months, and get semi-good at the game. Go from a newbie to a good rook, or at least a regular rook. Then come back and see if you still like your ideas.

Darth Windu
08-07-2002, 03:43 AM
sithmaster, the reasons for merging the mech destroyer/anti-air mobile and creating a new light assault mech are-

- reduced micromanagement
- more 'realism'
- altered gameplay and strategies
- anti-air mobile more useful
- cheaper, less powerful assault mech for tech 3

Sithmaster_821
08-07-2002, 06:19 PM
1. same amount of micro for those of us who use groups properly
2. less realism-just because it kills a mech doesnt make it a mech destroyer. Looking for realism? See what the others suggested.
3. Yep, its called mass the aam or be destroyed by your enemy's aams
4. I thought they were very effective already.
5. Can you say uber-unit?

Listen to others, they are far smarter than you are.

And since you dont get the whole gameplay over realism, Bruce Shelley will explain here (http://gamespy.com/devdiary/august02/aom1/) and here (http://aom.heavengames.com/features/articles/research)

simwiz2
08-07-2002, 08:14 PM
Originally posted by Darth Windu
cheaper, less powerful assault mech for tech 3

So it will be an all-powerful unit.

Sithmaster_821
08-07-2002, 09:11 PM
Click my links. I found them very informative (even if you dont like AoM).

Darth Windu
08-08-2002, 07:05 AM
How did you two figure that the AAM and light assault mech (LAM) would be 'uber' units? As i said, the AAM would only be effective against mechs, and easily destroyer by infantry. Also, the LAM would be, as i said, like the assault mech only cheaper, faster, much less powerful, less hp's, less armour etc. An all-round unit that would be effective against almost everything, just not as effective vs infantry as the strike mech, not as effective vs mechs as the AAM etc.

simwiz2
08-08-2002, 11:58 AM
Originally posted by Darth Windu
How did you two figure that the AAM and light assault mech (LAM) would be 'uber' units? As i said, the AAM would only be effective against mechs, and easily destroyer by infantry. Also, the LAM would be, as i said, like the assault mech only cheaper, faster, much less powerful, less hp's, less armour etc. An all-round unit that would be effective against almost everything, just not as effective vs infantry as the strike mech, not as effective vs mechs as the AAM etc.

Whether LucasArts was able to find a way to balance your rediculous idea or not, it would reduce the importance of combined arms. Why do you want the game simpler Windu? Do you want to just build 200 AAM's and be able to take down mechs, and air, and even troops with those kind of numbers? You need to learn strategy, not try to make the game simpler so that you can beat the AI on easiest.

Sithmaster_821
08-08-2002, 08:23 PM
How did you two figure that the AAM and light assault mech (LAM) would be 'uber' units?
Youve got two options, take your pick:
1. The unit strength in killing mechs and air stay the same, thus creating a uber unit (it takes 5 fu repeaters to kill 1 fu mech destroyer).
or
2. The unit is cut down for balance purposes and mechs/air rein supreme because their main couter is now weaker than before.

Also, why in the world do you want a 3rd age assault mech. It doesnt fit in gameplay, not in the movies, is it only because you used it in C&C and liked it and want it in this game? If so that is soooo pathetic!

Darth Windu
08-09-2002, 06:10 AM
simwiz - building 200 AAM's would be like building (in ground war terms) 200 mech destroyer's. Would you seriously send 200 mech destroyer's up against, say 200 repeater troopers or 200 grenade troopers?

sithmaster - as i said, the LAM would be an all-round unit that you would be able to build in order to field a nice mech army before gaining access to the assault mech. As i said, go and play Command & Conquer: Red Alert, it is the only way you are really goinjg to understand the changes i am proposing.

simwiz2
08-09-2002, 08:07 PM
Originally posted by Darth Windu
simwiz - building 200 AAM's would be like building (in ground war terms) 200 mech destroyer's. Would you seriously send 200 mech destroyer's up against, say 200 repeater troopers or 200 grenade troopers?

Grenade troopers? No. But who would build 200 grenade troopers? Laser troopers? Yes! It takes some 3-5 laser troopers to take out a mech destroyer, depending on each unit's civ. So unless they got around the max pop and have 600 laser troopers, my units are quite safe.

I once played against someone who built an army based around mech destroyers (we were both empire). IIRC empire is missing an important grenadier upgrade, and I had nowhere near the number of mech destroyers needed to counter it, and my grenadiers didn't work too well. He had air superiority also. I lost. And yes, he did send ~60 mech destroyers up against 40 laser troopers and 5 assault mechs, and a few grenadiers and other units, so mech destroyers can't be too bad against troopers. Now cost effectively, OTOH, they are very bad against troopers.

Legacy_Of_Sith
08-13-2002, 07:11 PM
No offense Windu, but all your mergers would really dumb the game down. The game would be too simple.

Darth Windu
08-14-2002, 03:57 AM
*sigh* go and play Command & Conquer then get back to me.

memezcom
08-14-2002, 07:38 AM
Seems to have reached a stalemate this debate!

If I recall, Lucasarts do browse these fan forums...
If not, then forward your idea to them...
Or ultimately, become a game designer yourself... :)

I simply enjoyed the game for what it was and am not bothered about these sort of 'fine details'......

Legacy_Of_Sith
08-14-2002, 12:20 PM
Windu I've played nearly every game in the C+C series, and they're great. But a star wars game is not worthy of stupid tank rushes.

Darth Windu
08-15-2002, 06:17 AM
well if you have played C&C, my idea for the mech destroyer / AAM merger would be like the GDI missile launcher / MLRS from the original. Besides, if they have all this advanced technology, why would they create a unit that can only fire at aircraft when they could produce units that could fire at air and ground units?

Kryllith
08-15-2002, 09:41 AM
*shrugs* If that's the case, why not give all the assault mechs anti-air capability, not just the mini-assault mechsssssss you're proposing?

Kryllith

Darth Windu
08-16-2002, 10:02 AM
i'm not saying that the light assault mech would get Anti-Air capability, it wouldnt.

Kryllith
08-17-2002, 01:52 AM
Ah, I thought you were planning to merge the current mech destroyers with the AA Artillery to produce the light assault mechs. Guess I read it wrong.

Kryllith

Darth Windu
08-17-2002, 03:21 AM
No, my idea is to change the mech destroyer and AAM to form-

1. AAM that also has mech destroyer abilities, but is ineffective against anything else (ie ships, infantry etc)

2. Light Assault Mech that would would be cheaper, faster, faster to build and available a tech level earlier than the Assault mech, but no troop carrying ability, less hp's, less armour and less firepower.

Kryllith
08-17-2002, 12:18 PM
Ok, my question then is how does the light assault mech differ from the current mech destroyer? Does it not get a bonus to attacking mechs? Does it get splash damage?

Kryllith

Darth Windu
08-18-2002, 03:57 AM
The Light Assault Mech would be an all-round unit mainly to provide mech support for infantry and assault mechs. It would be effective against everything (except air) but it would be less effective vs infantry then the strike mech, less effective vs mechs then the AAM for example.

So while the AAM and strike mech would be very specific as to their use, the LAM would be an all-rounder that would be cheaper, faster and faster to build than the assault mech.

lukeiamyourdad
08-22-2002, 02:52 PM
No matter what kind of balance you give it a light assault mech would be too powerful. Even if it is less effective against troopers, in good numbers you can beat an enemy group of troopers. And besides, assault mechs are good against buildings in general. A light version would be less effective of course be still would be TOO POWERFUL.:mob: :atpt:

Kryllith
08-22-2002, 03:41 PM
What I don't like about this set up is it does nothing to create diversity between the civs. All the civs would have AA artillery that can fire upon mechs, and all the civs would have the light assaults. I'd prefer keeping the mech destroyers and giving mech/heavy attack capabilities solely to the Confed AA artillery as an upgrade. This would then give a little more diversity, like the way giving AT-ATs the ability to attack air does...

Kryllith

Darth Windu
08-23-2002, 06:41 AM
kyrillth - i believe that these changes would enhance gameplay significantly, and adding more research options really isnt a good idea. However if there is a GB2, i would hope that each civ is unique to the point that there are big differences in each of their units, but thats not feasible at the mone tin GB.

Also, the LAM would give players a good all-round unit to use before you can get assault mechs to provide assistance to infantry in ground assaults, base defense etc or to act on their own. I also think giving AAM's a ground attack ability, specifically against mechs, would increase their usefulness, give them at least a small amount of protection, and chnage gameplay abd strategy's which i think is necessary to keep tghe game 'fresh'.

simwiz2
08-23-2002, 01:35 PM
Originally posted by Darth Windu
(1) Also, the LAM would give players a good all-round unit to use before you can get assault mechs to provide assistance to infantry in ground assaults, base defense etc or to act on their own.
(2) I also think giving AAM's a ground attack ability, specifically against mechs, would increase their usefulness, give them at least a small amount of protection, and chnage gameplay abd strategy's which i think is necessary to keep tghe game 'fresh'.

1 - If it can do all of those things it will be overpowered.

2 - People will just mass AAM's. There's no way around it. If you keep it good against air and make it good against mechs, it will be overpowered. If you make it bad against mechs then it will be useless in your added role, and mechs will become overpowered. And if you make it average against both mechs and air then mechs and air will become overpowered. It will not add any strategy, it will just make the game a race to get the most AAM's. If you leave your AAM's undefended, they should die, it's that simple.

lukeiamyourdad
08-23-2002, 02:47 PM
I think they made the AAM and other anti-air only units not capable to attack ground targets so you would need to defend them adding so difficulty to the game.

W0RF
08-23-2002, 04:04 PM
You also have to remember that the original AoK had no air units like SWGB does so creating air units not affected by ground made it necessary to also create anti-air units. To have it also be able to attack ground would make it excessively powerful, rather than actually making people use their units strategically. To my knowledge, the only ground-based unit that has anti-air is the FU AT-AT.

KoL ShadowJedi
08-23-2002, 09:07 PM
windu, windu, windu............

always trying to merge things

next u'll be trying to merge men and women into one species

**shudders**

get a grip man, stop trying to merge!!!!

Darth Windu
08-24-2002, 12:17 AM
Let me just clear something up here. The AAM would be-
-good vs air (obviously)
-good vs mechs
-poor vs ships
-poor vs heavy weapons
-ineffective vs infantry
-ineffective vs buildings

So a small force of infantry would be able to wipe out a large AAM force if it didnt have strike, infantry etc escorts.

lukeiamyourdad
08-24-2002, 02:37 PM
Windu you don't get it...

Even if it is innefective against infantry does not mean it completely sucks against infantry. Like the grenade trooper, it is inneffective against infantry but in great numbers it can fight them off. Besides, even if it can't a small escort of stirke mechs can beat off the enemy infantry.

Darth Windu
08-24-2002, 11:42 PM
actually thats exactly what it means. Ineffective means that it would not be effective. Therefore the AAM would be able to defend itself, but it you just used a large group of them on the battlefield you would get slaughtered.

simwiz2
08-25-2002, 02:05 PM
Originally posted by Darth Windu
actually thats exactly what it means. Ineffective means that it would not be effective. Therefore the AAM would be able to defend itself, but it you just used a large group of them on the battlefield you would get slaughtered.

You mean the same way the 200 mech destroyers would get slaughtered? :rolleyes: Windu, learn how to play GB, then post.

Darth Windu
08-26-2002, 10:14 AM
simwiz - as i have posted, the AAM would have mech destroying abilities, not infantry or building destroying abilities, hence the term 'mech destroyer'. I suggest that you take the time to read previous posts before responding next time.

lukeiamyourdad
08-26-2002, 11:27 AM
Windu, the only problem with an AA/mech destroyer would be that it shoots both air and ground. Remember what i said earlier, LA made the AA to be just AA so it would add difficulty to the game, you would need to defend them with a wide array of different units including the mech destroyer. The only thing I agree is to give the Confederacy AAM the ability to attack ground targets with a smaller range and bad accuracy. But I don't want every AAM to be able to do that.

simwiz2
08-26-2002, 01:25 PM
Originally posted by Darth Windu
simwiz - as i have posted, the AAM would have mech destroying abilities, not infantry or building destroying abilities, hence the term 'mech destroyer'. I suggest that you take the time to read previous posts before responding next time.

And the Mech Destroyer has mech destroying abilities but is comparably poor vs infantry, hence the term "Mech Destroyer". But that doesn't stop one Mech Destroyer from taking out 4 laser troopers. I said this because first you said that 200 mech destroyers would be ineffective, which i proved wrong, now you say AAM's would be slaughtered. Your change is pointless. Either you take away the AAM/MD's anti-trooper so that they re helpless against troops (which is rediculous), or you have a uber-unit. JUST LEAVE IT ALONE! LucasArts is smarter than you Windu.

I suggest you take the time to learn how to play GB, then take the time to post intelligent, sensible ideas.

Sithmaster_821
08-26-2002, 05:29 PM
Windu, play SWGB and get back to us. We are all patient people (excluding you), and can wait until t4 for a balanced am. As for your aam, two units for the price of one spells trouble.

Simwiz, your gonna hate me but im an AoM alpha tester. More later. It kicks a$$