Skittles! wrote:Don't complain. You should be happy that you got rid of a reviver
because you told me I had to kill him! Dude the only thing I didn't like about this game is that you were too biased. You didn't let the game run it's course you added players you adjusted kills you made people kill who you wanted to die. I want to make my own decisions not have them made by my mod
I've told you many, many times Iliad - I made the game go along with the plot of the actual game. The reinforcements were part of the plot of the game, so I added the reinforcements. And no, the only person I wanted to die was muy_thaiguy because he was a deadbeating, no good player. I adjusted one, yes one, kill because that was part of someone's role. Oh woo, I totally stuffed up there.
Please, Iliad, STFU. You're calling me biased yet you're going on about you. "Oh look at me, I didn't get to choose who I wanted to kill ONCE." Boo-hoo.
KraphtOne wrote:when you sign up a new account one of the check boxes should be "do you want to foe colton24 (it is highly recommended) "
Sierra_Leon wrote:Stop whining already. The game was fun, wasn't it?
I am pretty curious if the reinforcements were planned from the start, or if they were added later for game balance.
To be honest, they weren't planned from the start. But then I had the idea to add them in, so I did. Call me biased or whatever, but I already had a biased co-mod for Chaos so I had to sort it out, eh?
KraphtOne wrote:when you sign up a new account one of the check boxes should be "do you want to foe colton24 (it is highly recommended) "
Skittles! wrote:I've told you many, many times Iliad - I made the game go along with the plot of the actual game. The reinforcements were part of the plot of the game, so I added the reinforcements. And no, the only person I wanted to die was muy_thaiguy because he was a deadbeating, no good player. I adjusted one, yes one, kill because that was part of someone's role. Oh woo, I totally stuffed up there.
Please, Iliad, STFU. You're calling me biased yet you're going on about you. "Oh look at me, I didn't get to choose who I wanted to kill ONCE." Boo-hoo.
Looks I'm only trying to help you by giving feedback:
1. I didn't want to kill mtg. He was deadbeating and so of no threat to me. I would rather killed someone else who was a threat
Neutrino wrote:The Waaaagh! thing was the Orks's best bet. 2 kills for a single death is pretty reasonable. Individual Orks may die but the whole lives on
It probably should have been 1:3, though. The Orks just didn't have numbers to keep the killin' up.
it was 2:2 which meant the orks were fucked. But it was an interesting idea at 2:1 or 3:1
Neutrino wrote:The Waaaagh! thing was the Orks's best bet. 2 kills for a single death is pretty reasonable. Individual Orks may die but the whole lives on
It probably should have been 1:3, though. The Orks just didn't have numbers to keep the killin' up.
it was 2:2 which meant the orks were fucked. But it was an interesting idea at 2:1 or 3:1
The only enforced casualty was a single Ork. The trigger Ork would have died anyway, so he's not counted as a casualty.
We own all your helmets, we own all your shoes, we own all your generals. Touch us and you loooose...
Neutrino wrote:The Waaaagh! thing was the Orks's best bet. 2 kills for a single death is pretty reasonable. Individual Orks may die but the whole lives on
It probably should have been 1:3, though. The Orks just didn't have numbers to keep the killin' up.
it was 2:2 which meant the orks were fucked. But it was an interesting idea at 2:1 or 3:1
The only enforced casualty was a single Ork. The trigger Ork would have died anyway, so he's not counted as a casualty.
no I lost two orks to make two kills making it 2:2
Neutrino wrote:The Waaaagh! thing was the Orks's best bet. 2 kills for a single death is pretty reasonable. Individual Orks may die but the whole lives on
It probably should have been 1:3, though. The Orks just didn't have numbers to keep the killin' up.
it was 2:2 which meant the orks were fucked. But it was an interesting idea at 2:1 or 3:1
The only enforced casualty was a single Ork. The trigger Ork would have died anyway, so he's not counted as a casualty.
no I lost two orks to make two kills making it 2:2
Yeah, but one of those Orks would have died whether you got to Waaaaaagh! or not. All that death did was serve as a trigger for the Waaaaaaagh!, not actually take any part in it.
I admit though that 2:1 kills for that few Orks was a bit viscious. However, once you got your SK abilities the Ork faction had as much chance of winning as the regular SK does.
We own all your helmets, we own all your shoes, we own all your generals. Touch us and you loooose...
