tank transport.

[lav_coyote25]

has anyone done up a tank transport mod? it seems i am amongst a very few that wish this to be back in skirmish/mutiplayer.

[Rman Virgil]

has anyone done up a tank transport mod? it seems i am amongst a very few that wish this to be back in skirmish/mutiplayer.

Can't be done as a Mod till a change is made in the binary last I looked.
.

[Black Project]

has anyone done up a tank transport mod? it seems i am amongst a very few that wish this to be back in skirmish/mutiplayer.

Hey, i'm that black list too

If nobody else complains that will break game balancing (which is not the reason ), i will be happy.

BP

[WarTux]

Same here!

I made an official "proposal" over here (solution #4), but it seems to have gotten quite a lot of negative reception.

[Rman Virgil]

Same here!

I made an official "proposal" over here (solution #4), but it seems to have gotten quite a lot of negative reception.

Same here. I would love to work with them within the LZ scheme proposal which is basically modeled on how they work in the original campaign..

As a Mod you have a choice to play with it or not so the naysayers voices, I would say, are moot & I would hardly jump to the conclusion that they represent a majority consensus; and even if they did represent such, it would still be moot under the conditions of a Mod which amounts to the credo "live & let live" & viva la differance !

.

[Zarel]

The proposal as written didn't mention "mod support" anywhere.

I think it would've gotten more approval if it had been clear it was about mod support, and not adding it to default game.

[Rman Virgil]

.

The proposal as written didn't mention "mod support" anywhere.

I think it would've gotten more approval if it had been clear it was about mod support, and not adding it to default game.

Partly explains it, though you would think the naysayers capable of making that basic stipulation - assuming a capacity for a common perspective. But then again such assumption is risk best averted in the cyber shallows.

I daresay it is interesting how much seems to devolve into popularity contests over hypotheticals sans hard evidence with vacuous rewards for incentive.
.

[lav_coyote25]

ok, how does one reset the count??? does one have to delete the original? or is there a reset tag i am missing?

[lav_coyote25]

The proposal as written didn't mention "mod support" anywhere.

I think it would've gotten more approval if it had been clear it was about mod support, and not adding it to default game.

so, for two words, it gets a negative?

[Zarel]

Partly explains it, though you would think the naysayers capable of making that basic stipulation - assuming a capacity for a common perspective. But then again such assumption is risk best averted in the cyber shallows.

I daresay it is interesting how much seems to devolve into popularity contests over hypotheticals sans hard evidence with vacuous rewards for incentive.

Many spurious criticisms of usability (and, analogously, writing clearly) can be summarized like that - "Why should I do it? Smart people will be able to figure out what it means, and no one else matters."

There are a huge number of things wrong with this position:

1. Disregarding people who don't conform to your arbitrary standard of intelligence is straight-up indisputable elitism.

2. It's not necessarily about people who don't understand you. It's also about how long that takes. By refusing to spend several minutes clarifying your writing, you are valuing those several minutes higher than the many man-hours of people who try to understand your writing

And this is all presuming it's even a valid conclusion that the suggestion was about mod support and not about direct implementation, which wasn't even clear to me.

ok, how does one reset the count??? does one have to delete the original? or is there a reset tag i am missing?

I'd suggest just creating a new idea. Implementing something into the game and implementing mod support for it are two different suggestions, anyway.

so, for two words, it gets a negative?

Considering those two words change the meaning of the suggestion entirely, yes. It's like comparing "Shoot Barack Obama" to "Shoot a picture of Barack Obama". Some words are pretty important.

[WarTux]

Now why would someone vote against making the tank transport modable!? WHY!?

[lav_coyote25]

because they do not know how to use it. or , they are chicken.... dunno. if they say it affects balance, i would like them to show how, by using it in a game, and recording it. if it is available, the mod could have it down to 2 only for each player, that way it wont give a hit to the Frame rate. also weaponized, it could use a slow loading lancer, or howitzer... also loadouts would be , 20 normal cyborg load, or, 10 super cyborgs, or , 10 light tanks,or, 8 medium tanks, or, 6 heavy tanks, or, 4 superheavy tanks .

[zydonk]

Put the Transporter in, then we'll see how it affects gameplay. We do it for borgs, why not for tanks and things?

[Wibble199]

If balance is the issue, why not make it like a Chinook, that can carry just two vehicles at a time plus a few troops (cyborgs)

[Rman Virgil]

.

Balance is not anymore of a problem with "LZ Deploy Limits" than the placement of Base Platforms or Oil Resources in the map crafting phase.

Those that are voteing "No" on the Idea Torrent are voting out of pure ignorance.

.