|· Portal||Help Search Members Calendar|
|Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )||Resend Validation Email|
|Welcome to Nintendo Wars Series. We hope you enjoy your visit.|
You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.
Join our community!
If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:
Posted: May 31 2006, 12:26 PM
Battle Car Captain
Member No.: 2
Joined: 1-August 05
Xenesis and Sven are both insulting GBW3 in this topic.
Really, I am *NOT* denying that some things in GBW3 are imbalanced, particularly the main ranged-fire units. But really, this is going too far.
Which units are even situational in GBW3 anyway? The Mech? It can range-fire on armored land units, which are the only non-sea units that aren't vulnerable to AA Tanks. The APC? It's impossible to 1HK without the Mercenary Tank or any air unit with decent AT power, whereas the Transport Truck can be killed by an AA Tank, not just an Attacker or a Battle Helicopter. The IFV would have to be nerfed anyway, as 6 Movement Power is too much for it. The Tank Destroyer? It would have to be changed a bit anyway. The Anti-Sea Helicopter? Air units are bloody underpowered vs. the navy anyway. The Tanker? Well, supplies weren't really an issue in GBW3's navy anyway, unless Submarines got involved and the Tanker couldn't be used for that.
.....one of these days, I should post an editorial discussing GBW3's balance, especially in comparison to AWDS's.
Captain of the Battle Car Squad. Those Transport Planes certainly help.