10.01.2013 - 13:56
Why isn't there an upgrade for reducing destroyer cost by 10? There is one for marines, for infantry transports and sentries, but NC isn't a popular strat and without any upgrades for it it wouldn't be likely to become a popular strat in the future
---- [pr] Commando Eagle: duel? [pr] Commando Eagle: i have to regain back the lost elos and gain extra as punishment for rush
duke u karikuar...
duke u karikuar...
|
|
11.01.2013 - 07:31
Good idea.
---- "Whenever death may surprise us, let it be welcome if our battle cry has reached even one receptive ear and another hand reaches out to take up our arms".
duke u karikuar...
duke u karikuar...
|
|
duke u karikuar...
duke u karikuar...
|
|
duke u karikuar...
duke u karikuar...
|
|
11.01.2013 - 08:36
NC destroyers are too cheap and there are enough upgrades out there. IRL a destroyer costs so much only USA, China, Russia and UK can spam a few of them. What they do lack is firepower. Destroyers should have NC attack always, keeping their cost high. One could also add +1 defence (but not +2 as in NC). Naval Commander needs to have reduced cost for marines. This improves attacking chances on land especially when invading distant overseas lands. That is the whole idea of a strong naval force. *Did you know marines are also known as naval infantry?* I also have wondered why destroyers aren't able to carry marine units. I guess it is too late development-wise for this consideration.
---- hue
duke u karikuar...
duke u karikuar...
|
|
11.01.2013 - 10:23
I agree with ZOG. Also modern ships are used to launch cruise missiles against ground targets, so its not like they're not used irl. 11 attack would do nicely.
duke u karikuar...
duke u karikuar...
|
A je i sigurt?