| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| this vote will decide about the future of this invention: |
| this can be added to the game |
|
60% |
[ 9 ] |
| it needs some changes but it is a good invention |
|
6% |
[ 1 ] |
| i will post the needed changes here |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| no good try another one |
|
33% |
[ 5 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 15 |
|
| Author |
Message |
tec_server
Technology Bot
Joined: 04 Nov 2002
Posts: 1746
|
 Posted: Sat May 29, 2004 5:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
deathride (class 3 ship)
class 3 mothership that can provide a warpfield for the whole fleet.
warp: 5
attack/life: 0/400
manpower: 110
researchtime: 1 d
buildingtime: 12 h
 human-technology
needed research:
leadership
battle details:
battle engine syntax:
|
|
| Back to top » |
|
 |
masterp
1st Rear Admiral
Joined: 11 Jun 2003
Posts: 237
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Sat May 29, 2004 6:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
i don't know why we need a c3 mothership!
and it needs more mp!
Greets |
|
| Back to top » |
|
|
kamekaze6
Admiral
Joined: 12 Aug 2003
Posts: 1312
Location: Malta
|
| Posted: Sat May 29, 2004 8:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
maybe because pengs recycle after your class 4 enters a battle, if there s no class 4 then pengs don t recycle but why is it human and not mycelloid ifthat is the case??
_________________
STFU N00B!!!!111!1!
Click!! |
|
| Back to top » |
|
|
Weylyn
Admiral
Joined: 19 Jan 2004
Posts: 691
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Sat May 29, 2004 12:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The mp is about right, because a class-3 ms is a LOT more vulnerable.
_________________
Join the army, meet interesting people, kill them.
WoC-leader |
|
| Back to top » |
|
|
Lord Lou
Commander
Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 76
|
| Posted: Sat May 29, 2004 3:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I like the idea, but lower the LP, couse warp core in smaller ship should be quite un stable, or raise mp to 150-200.
Finally something intresting!
_________________
Protector of Weak, and Defender of Small.
...and I will strike down with great vengance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brotherin, and u will now my name is the Lord, when I lay my vengance upon you! |
|
| Back to top » |
|
|
KEPcH
Vice Admiral
Joined: 14 Jul 2003
Posts: 487
|
| Posted: Sat May 29, 2004 3:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mp can't be higher than 150, cuz a mothership has 320mp, but has 1000lp + a mothership "shouldn't" get destroyed. I'ld say bring the mp to 120-130.
Or 150 if you give it 500lp
About the mycelloid part, it wasn't invented for the penguins and it doesn't recycle itself, so I don't see anything mycelloidish about it.
[ This Message was edited by: KEPcH on 2004-05-30 00:30 ] |
|
| Back to top » |
|
|
spacetrace
Board Admin
Joined: 24 Dec 2001
Posts: 1624
|
| Posted: Sun May 30, 2004 11:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
i think it is a interesting idea, but mp needs to be higher...
compare with lowrider , wich is an elaborated , balanced ship
[ This Message was edited by: spacetrace on 2004-05-30 12:31 ] |
|
| Back to top » |
|
|
KEPcH
Vice Admiral
Joined: 14 Jul 2003
Posts: 487
|
| Posted: Sun May 30, 2004 11:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
And what would you suggest?
I saw the flamingo has 500 lp for 100 mp, so 110 mp for a warpfield might not enough. But this ship is a class3 and will (almost certainly) get shot.
I would prefer to lower the lp instead of raising the mp.
What do you think? |
|
| Back to top » |
|
|
KEPcH
Vice Admiral
Joined: 14 Jul 2003
Posts: 487
|
| Posted: Sun May 30, 2004 4:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| And I don't think the lowrider is that balanced cuz nobody uses it... |
|
| Back to top » |
|
|
blackmagic
Admiral
Joined: 12 Feb 2003
Posts: 1157
Location: GP
|
| Posted: Sun May 30, 2004 11:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| This is an ineresting idea, but its true that there needs to be more mp and less LP. Having a C3 ship with warp capabilities is too advantagious. You should give it a downside like the lowrider does. Such as self destruct( which would not be a good idea LOL) or recycle, but you are allowed to have more than one of the deathrides. |
|
| Back to top » |
|
|
doomstar
Vice Admiral
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 408
|
| Posted: Mon May 31, 2004 9:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I thought admin favors the ship. Why is the ship in Impossible Invention?
 |
|
| Back to top » |
|
|
KEPcH
Vice Admiral
Joined: 14 Jul 2003
Posts: 487
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 01, 2004 12:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Admins?
Any response? |
|
| Back to top » |
|
|
blackmagic
Admiral
Joined: 12 Feb 2003
Posts: 1157
Location: GP
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 01, 2004 3:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sometimes the Tech_server puts inventions in here becuase he didn't like it or just for cleaning up =) Also, the admins sometimes just change thier minds...who knows. or it could have been a mistake.... or they could have read my last post and agreed with me LOL |
|
| Back to top » |
|
|
tec_server
Technology Bot
Joined: 04 Nov 2002
Posts: 1746
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 01, 2004 7:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry, because all the stupid inventions I thought it would be nice to update the impossible encyclopedia. I thought blackmagic made this ship 
But it belongs of course not here.
|
|
| Back to top » |
|
|
KEPcH
Vice Admiral
Joined: 14 Jul 2003
Posts: 487
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 01, 2004 1:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
How about we halve the lp?
200lp for the same mp?
And maybe not reconstructable? |
|
| Back to top » |
|
|
blackmagic
Admiral
Joined: 12 Feb 2003
Posts: 1157
Location: GP
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 01, 2004 3:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
LOL HAHA Funny  |
|
| Back to top » |
|
|
|
