Heroscapers

Heroscapers (https://www.heroscapers.com/community/index.php)
-   C3G Library (https://www.heroscapers.com/community/forumdisplay.php?f=167)
-   -   The Book of C3G Destructible Object Rules (https://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?t=55039)

Lazy Orang August 29th, 2018 05:10 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by IAmBatman (Post 2217009)
It could be yeah, but donít some existing figures, such as Hawkeye II, offer similar services?

Yeah, thinking about it, I'm not really sure what a Sports Car is providing that Hawkeye can't in that regard (aside from carrying up to 2 figures at a time and being functionally uncommon - maybe that's it?)

Tornado August 29th, 2018 05:15 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Bailey driving into the enemy and exploding sounds pretty awesome. :)

Ronin August 29th, 2018 05:17 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
They provide really good protection - figures in vehicles aren't on the battlefield and they can't be targeted for attacks or most special powers. (That also impairs a lot of bonding powers, so you can lose some efficiency by piling into vehicles)

They also don't take LEAs.

My first test exploited that, with Conan effectively hiding in the car (forcing the enemy to punch through it before they had a shot at him) and doling out auto-wounds.

Conan isn't that slow, but he's a rare figure who, if he takes an auto-wound when the car is destroyed, actually benefits.

IAmBatman August 29th, 2018 05:41 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Sounds like Wolverine would like a car. Should we up the wounds received from crashing your car to balance the advantage some?

Ronin August 29th, 2018 05:42 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by IAmBatman (Post 2217043)
Sounds like Wolverine would like a car. Should we up the wounds received from crashing your car to balance the advantage some?

Maybe. Could be a reasonable measure, but I don't know that it's necessary yet.

IAmBatman August 29th, 2018 05:43 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
OK. Sounds good. :up: Thanks for tackling this.

quozl August 29th, 2018 05:47 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Just curious because of the Rip Hunter discussion, are you allowing figures in vehicles to use special powers?

Lazy Orang August 29th, 2018 05:47 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by IAmBatman (Post 2217043)
Sounds like Wolverine would like a car. Should we up the wounds received from crashing your car to balance the advantage some?

Slightly more significant tweak to the existing rules, but I'd be in favour - it's thematically justifiable and it might help balance it more.

Ronin August 29th, 2018 05:51 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by quozl (Post 2217056)
Just curious because of the Rip Hunter discussion, are you allowing figures in vehicles to use special powers?

I wasn't in the first two games. It would have been a non-factor in the two games I played (because I planned armies around not being able to), but I might plan some slightly different armies for future games, with special powers on the table for figures in vehicles.

"Zombies driving cars" strategy gets a boost from figures in vehicles using special powers, since Lurkers can chill in cars and command Walkers outside the cards.

quozl August 29th, 2018 06:12 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
This line will need to be changed:

Quote:

After revealing an Order Marker on one of your Army Cards, before taking a turn with a figure you control occupying a vehicle, you may move that vehicle.
You can't take a turn with a figure not on the battlefield.

Ronin August 29th, 2018 06:13 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Yeah, I noticed that some of the language needs tweaked. You wouldn't control a figure occupying a vehicle.

Let me know if you catch anything else that needs an update.

Ronin September 5th, 2018 04:49 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Lost my notes on my first three games, but my basic impression was that the Sports Car was fine at 150 and went 1-2. I'll run two more and formally type those up and then we can move this along.

Ronin September 5th, 2018 06:16 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
C3G STANDARD PLAYTEST FEEDBACK FORM

NAME OF THE PLAYTEST UNIT: Sports Car

Army Test
Map: Green Lantern (Mogo)
Units: Sports Car @150, Mantis, Zombie, Larfleeze, Alien Drone, Atom (1000) vs Captain America, Bucky, Luke Cage, Iron Fist, Iron Man Mk IV (1000)
Spoiler Alert!

___________________________________________________________

Army Test
Map: Mountain Spring
Units: Sports Car @150, Star-Lord, Mantis, Nebula, White Tiger (1000) vs Fantastic Four (1000)
Spoiler Alert!


THOUGHTS ON THE TESTED UNIT'S COST, BALANCE, & DRAFTABILITY: The Sports Car feels okay to me at 150 - it went 2-3 counting the games that I lost my notes for.

Its greatest tactical advantage is probably the protection it offers for its occupants, but the mobility and auto-wounds ain't bad either.

I think further testing should probably focus on ways to leverage figures in the Sports Car being able to use special powers - that was used a little bit in the later games here, but I didn't set up the armies to really try and juice that. Also, more multi-car games and games with squads driving cars would be interesting to see.

IAmBatman September 5th, 2018 06:26 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Great job on the tests! :up:

Any tips on figures that might be good for abusing the car with special powers?

Ronin September 5th, 2018 06:30 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Not immediately. I wasn't looking for that when I was initially looking for figures to test the car with. Any thoughts from @dok ?

Scapemage September 5th, 2018 06:33 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Awesome stuff! Glad to see this moving.

dok September 5th, 2018 07:23 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Where do I look at the actual designs of the vehicles?

If you are allowed to reveal OMs as usual, can you use "instead of taking a turn" powers while on a vehicle card? Can Nick Fury or Mad Thinker use their bonding powers (which do not have clear sight requirements) from inside the vehicle?

The same questions apply to figures on Kang2's card, as I noted before. But Kang2 is expensive and demands a certain sort of build. The "hide your Joker/Ozy/Silk Spectre/Destiny/bonding hub/etc" strategy works a lot better when you're hiding them in a relatively cheap vehicl, that spits them out when they die, as opposed to an expensive Kang that doesn't.

Basically, I think the biggest competitive use for vehicles will be as a suit of armor for figures that don't currently need to be in the fray.

But that's without seeing the vehicle cards themselves.

Ronin September 5th, 2018 07:30 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by dok (Post 2219091)
Where do I look at the actual designs of the vehicles?

If you are allowed to reveal OMs as usual, can you use "instead of taking a turn" powers while on a vehicle card? Can Nick Fury or Mad Thinker use their bonding powers (which do not have clear sight requirements) from inside the vehicle?

The same questions apply to figures on Kang2's card, as I noted before. But Kang2 is expensive and demands a certain sort of build. The "hide your Joker/Ozy/Silk Spectre/Destiny/bonding hub/etc" strategy works a lot better when you're hiding them in a relatively cheap vehicl, that spits them out when they die, as opposed to an expensive Kang that doesn't.

Basically, I think the biggest competitive use for vehicles will be as a suit of armor for figures that don't currently need to be in the fray.

But that's without seeing the vehicle cards themselves.

Sports Car and Mole Machine (untested as of yet). And the current vehicle rules.

Agreed on the 'car armor' point.

I think unlike Kang (II), vehicles could allow you to use 'instead of taking a turn' powers. I started testing before we flipped that Kang (II) ruling, though, so I wasn't really hitting that at first.

Lazy Orang September 5th, 2018 07:31 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by dok (Post 2219091)
Where do I look at the actual designs of the vehicles?

If you are allowed to reveal OMs as usual, can you use "instead of taking a turn" powers while on a vehicle card? Can Nick Fury or Mad Thinker use their bonding powers (which do not have clear sight requirements) from inside the vehicle?

The same questions apply to figures on Kang2's card, as I noted before. But Kang2 is expensive and demands a certain sort of build. The "hide your Joker/Ozy/Silk Spectre/Destiny/bonding hub/etc" strategy works a lot better when you're hiding them in a relatively cheap vehicl, that spits them out when they die, as opposed to an expensive Kang that doesn't.

Basically, I think the biggest competitive use for vehicles will be as a suit of armor for figures that don't currently need to be in the fray.

But that's without seeing the vehicle cards themselves.

Sports Car
Mole Machine


We don't have any others yet.

Ronin September 5th, 2018 07:43 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
We have some flexibility in that we're gonna be updating the Vehicle Rules to make em draftable anyway - if you think it would be worth specifically shutting down special powers for figures in vehicles, in order to keep them from just being Joker Armor or whatever, I think that would be a reasonable tweak to keep their costs from being inflated too much.

dok September 5th, 2018 07:43 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Yeah... this needs to get addressed. When it was just Kang2 and a few opponent's abilities, it didn't really matter from a competitive perspective. But if we allow "instead of taking a turn" powers, or even more general synergy powers (e.g. Destiny Probability Manipulation, Joker(I)/Ozy OM stuff, etc) to be done from inside the vehicle, then it's a very big deal.

I believe the ruling is still that you can't take "instead of taking a turn" powers from Kang's card. See the Nick Fury ruling:

Quote:

Originally Posted by tcglkn (Post 1270570)
Q- Can I put Order Markers on Nick Fury and use his Director of S.H.I.E.L.D. special power to take a turn with a unit on the battlefield while Nick Fury isn't on the battlefield due to not yet being placed by his Helicarrier Drop Team special power?
A- In short, no. While you can legally place Order Markers on Nick Fury's card while he is not on the battlefield, you can't actually take turns with him. And since Director of S.H.I.E.L.D. is "instead" of Nick Fury's turn, it requires that he be able to take that turn for him to be able to give that turn to a different figure.

You can reveal the OM on a non-destroyed off-battlefield figure, but you can't take a turn, is the way I interpret it.

Possible solutions in the next post.

dok September 5th, 2018 07:51 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
If we don't want the costs of these things to be driven by the ability to provide armor to support/bonding/passive power figures, then here are my suggestions:
  • Go through the the relevant powers of passive non-LOS support figures like Destiny, and probably Joker(I) and Ozy, and add a "while you control Destiny" to powers like probability manipulation. This sets it such that they can't use the powers unless the figure is physically on the battlefield.

  • Change the way OM reveals on figures in vehicles works so that it's clear the figure doesn't take a turn in the normal way. There's a lot of ways to do it, but the gist of it is you need to cut off the ability to use "instead of taking a turn" powers.

Nulling all powers while in vehicles would obviously work, although it might be overkill (I think it's OK for Healing Factor X to work inside a vehicle, for example).

Ronin September 5th, 2018 09:45 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by dok (Post 2219108)
Nulling all powers while in vehicles would obviously work, although it might be overkill (I think it's OK for Healing Factor X to work inside a vehicle, for example).

I don't mind healing factors not working in vehicles, if only because it means there's that much less reward for turtling inside them.

(And no special powers really simplifies testing)

Obviously you'd need some kind of carve-out for powers like Lady Blackhawk's that are specifically meant to work inside vehicles, but that's not a ton of language or anything.

IAmBatman September 5th, 2018 10:24 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
If figures can't use special powers at all while in vehicles, will that really dull the desire to draft them? Or do you feel they bring enough else to the table?

Ronin September 5th, 2018 10:27 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by IAmBatman (Post 2219150)
If figures can't use special powers at all while in vehicles, will that really dull the desire to draft them? Or do you feel they bring enough else to the table?

I was under the impression that figures in vehicles couldn't use special powers back when I started testing - the Rip/Kang stuff didn't come up until mid-initial - and they definitely still felt draftable. It makes them inherently a little more niche, but it puts more focus on the mobility aspect and the vehicle's powers as opposed to the protection aspect.

IAmBatman September 5th, 2018 10:33 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
I think that works. More of a sanity check than anything. I wanted to make sure that if we go in this direction we aren't tanking the whole VDO thing in general. :-)

Sounds good, though. If y'all can figure out just the right wording for this and if I retain time and sanity once I have my first set of papers in tomorrow, I'll put this next up for testing after I finish Psimon's initial.

dok September 6th, 2018 02:17 AM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ronin (Post 2219151)
It makes them inherently a little more niche, but it puts more focus on the mobility aspect and the vehicle's powers as opposed to the protection aspect.

The goal in my mind would be to make it so that vehicles can be priced for competitive drafting based on these aspects. If we have to price them based on the assumption that Ozymandias and Mad Thinker are chilling out in the sports car, then those sorts of builds end up being the only way the vehicles are useful. If we dismantle that sort of combo then we let them be vehicles instead of a stationary containment pod.

Lazy Orang September 6th, 2018 05:54 AM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by dok (Post 2219108)
If we don't want the costs of these things to be driven by the ability to provide armor to support/bonding/passive power figures, then here are my suggestions:
  • Go through the the relevant powers of passive non-LOS support figures like Destiny, and probably Joker(I) and Ozy, and add a "while you control Destiny" to powers like probability manipulation. This sets it such that they can't use the powers unless the figure is physically on the battlefield.

I'd do this... it eliminates the ability to exploit them with Joker, Ozymandias, Destiny, while causing the minimum of collateral. I'd rather not gut too much - it kills a little too much theme and too much strategy to me, makes the game less interesting. I vote for using a scalpel, not a sledgehammer.

Ronin September 6th, 2018 10:07 AM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Lazy Orang (Post 2219196)
Quote:

Originally Posted by dok (Post 2219108)
If we don't want the costs of these things to be driven by the ability to provide armor to support/bonding/passive power figures, then here are my suggestions:
  • Go through the the relevant powers of passive non-LOS support figures like Destiny, and probably Joker(I) and Ozy, and add a "while you control Destiny" to powers like probability manipulation. This sets it such that they can't use the powers unless the figure is physically on the battlefield.

I'd do this... it eliminates the ability to exploit them with Joker, Ozymandias, Destiny, while causing the minimum of collateral. I'd rather not gut too much - it kills a little too much theme and too much strategy to me, makes the game less interesting. I vote for using a scalpel, not a sledgehammer.

Pretty sure dok meant that you'd have to implement both of his bullet points there, not either/or.

I'd rather have simpler vehicle rules that didn't hugely affect design space than make a bunch of card updates so that in the future we always have to work around vehicles when designing support powers.

That said, sure, let's poll it out.

A. Make card updates and vehicle rule updates necessary to allow figures to use special in vehicles
B. Bar special powers from being used by figures in vehicles

IAmBatman September 6th, 2018 10:11 AM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
I'd lean towards B there, but would like a better idea of what the exact rules text would look like to see if there would be any unintended consequences and to see how clear and elegant it would be.

Since we'd be adding these to the existing designs as an augmentation, I'd rather the rules set bear most of the burden of eliminating competitive concerns.

Scapemage September 6th, 2018 10:12 AM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
B for sure. I don't see vehicles being used so often that they should need to be worked around for every card.

japes September 6th, 2018 10:29 AM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Quick Question, I thought one of the reasons for doing this was for figures like Lady Blackhawk? If we negate Special Powers while they are in the vehicle...doesn't that sort of negate the reason for doing this? Would it be easier to just update her card to allow her to start with a VDO in her start zone?

Lazy Orang September 6th, 2018 10:31 AM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
A - lets not harm the richness of the game and options for strategic possibilities by keeping everything too sealed away. Scalpel, not sledgehammer.

Ronin September 6th, 2018 10:33 AM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by japes (Post 2219231)
Quick Question, I thought one of the reasons for doing this was for figures like Lady Blackhawk? If we negate Special Powers while they are in the vehicle...doesn't that sort of negate the reason for doing this? Would it be easier to just update her card to allow her to start with a VDO in her start zone?

Wouldn't be a hard negation, just a "figures occupying vehicles may not use special powers, unless otherwise specified." sort of thing. Same as how destroyed figures can't use special powers... Unless they can.

japes September 6th, 2018 10:59 AM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ronin (Post 2219234)
Quote:

Originally Posted by japes (Post 2219231)
Quick Question, I thought one of the reasons for doing this was for figures like Lady Blackhawk? If we negate Special Powers while they are in the vehicle...doesn't that sort of negate the reason for doing this? Would it be easier to just update her card to allow her to start with a VDO in her start zone?

Wouldn't be a hard negation, just a "figures occupying vehicles may not use special powers, unless otherwise specified." sort of thing. Same as how destroyed figures can't use special powers... Unless they can.

Nothing in here specifies that it is otherwise allowed...

Quote:

ADEPT OPERATOR
After revealing an Order Marker on this card and moving a vehicle, you may move that vehicle one additional space. When rolling the 20-sided die for a vehicle that Lady Blackhawk occupies, you may add 2 to your roll.
If it's negated then it's useless and if we are going to edit her card to make it not nullified then wouldn't it be a easier process to just allow her to start with a VDO in her startzone? This just seems like a lot of hoops to jump through just to have figures that thematically use vehicles getting to use vehicles. Shouldn't those figures just start with that thematic vehicle the same way other figures start with regular DO? I'm starting to see why this hasn't happened sooner.

Ronin September 6th, 2018 11:07 AM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
I guess I'm not seeing the big obstacle that you are. That's super-trivial wording stuff.

Tanking this and just going for figures that start with VDOs would be a much more painful process, and it would limit the ability to design VDOs that don't have some thematic figure that would start with them. (Which is part of the reason I'm doing this in the first place)

Scapemage September 6th, 2018 11:14 AM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
I had forgotten about Lady Blackhawk's intent with all of this stuff (funny since I designed her). I would mind allowing her to start with a VDO or some other method of saying she gets a boost when a VDO is in your army.

Ronin September 6th, 2018 11:50 AM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Personally, I don't care one way or the other about Lady Blackhawk. I was doing this to open up design opportunities.

Redesigning and reevaluating her into a 300 point design that starts with a VDO sounds like a pretty comparable amount of work to what we have ahead of us at this point testing the two extant vehicles, though. Not a reasonable alternative to fiddling with some wording.

I'll try to get something official together on the wording front in a little bit, though.

quozl September 6th, 2018 12:06 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
The whole reason we're giving points to VDOs is so they can start in your startzone. We do not need to add starting VDOs to cards if we give VDOs point costs.

Ronin September 6th, 2018 12:11 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by quozl (Post 2219254)
The whole reason we're giving points to VDOs is so they can start in your startzone. We do not need to add starting VDOs to cards if we give VDOs point costs.

I believe japes was suggesting we scrap the whole thing and just update Lady Blackhawk instead.

japes September 6th, 2018 12:24 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
I'm completely aware that it's possible I'm over reacting. However, I don't want to have to worry about testing future designs with a car. VDO are cool and we occasionally use them but I don't want them to be necessary.

so looking back to this...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ronin (Post 2219221)
I'd rather have simpler vehicle rules that didn't hugely affect design space than make a bunch of card updates so that in the future we always have to work around vehicles when designing support powers.

Yes simple and not limiting is better.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ronin (Post 2219221)
That said, sure, let's poll it out.

A. Make card updates and vehicle rule updates necessary to allow figures to use special in vehicles
B. Bar special powers from being used by figures in vehicles

A. What specific updates. How do we decide what can and cannot be used from a car. Thematically it sounds weird that Wolverine can't heal while in a car and Professor X can't use his telekinetic bonding from inside the car and I personally don't want to update a ton of cards just to allow some things to work in a car.

B. If we bar special powers then the people that are upset about Lady Blackhawk now have reason to be more upset since her power can't be used at all now since it's specifically for driving VDO yet when she's in a VDO the power is negated.

I'm just not understanding what's being proposed anymore.

Lazy Orang September 6th, 2018 12:30 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
As much as I don't like B, I think it's fairly clear that Lady Blackhawk's power will be an exception to that rule. Special powers are stated in the rulebook as ways to break the rules of the game, after all, and if it's clear a rule is being ignored for a power to work, that's a power doing its job. Powers aren't supposed to work after a figure is dead, but that doesn't stop Grundy, or Thanos, or Jason.

Ronin September 6th, 2018 12:33 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by japes (Post 2219259)
A. What specific updates. How do we decide what can and cannot be used from a car. Thematically it sounds weird that Wolverine can't heal while in a car and Professor X can't use his telekinetic bonding from inside the car and I personally don't want to update a ton of cards just to allow some things to work in a car.

B. If we bar special powers then the people that are upset about Lady Blackhawk now have reason to be more upset since her power can't be used at all now since it's specifically for driving VDO yet when she's in a VDO the power is negated.

I'm just not understanding what's being proposed anymore.

A. A lot of updates, probably. You wouldn't be updating things to let them work in cars, you'd be updating powers like Reorganized Chaos and Destiny's d20 boost to keep them from working in cars, because a lot of powers get really juiced if you can use them from the safety of a vehicle. (And 'should this be usable in a car' would be a concern for all future support powers.)

B. I've said from the start that we're talking about a general prohibition, not hard-and-fast negation. Same as destroyed figures. Destroyed figures can't use special powers, generally, but when special powers tell you to do something after the figure is destroyed, you can do it. Vehicles rules would say you can't use special powers, generally. But when a special power says a figure occupying a vehicle can do something, they can do it.

quozl September 6th, 2018 12:48 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
I thought we had already ruled that figures' powers do not work when they are off the battlefield (except of course when their powers say they do). To enter a VDO, the figure is removed from the battlefield. So there's no change needed.

Ronin September 6th, 2018 12:52 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by quozl (Post 2219271)
I thought we had already ruled that figures' powers do not work when they are off the battlefield (except of course when their powers say they do). To enter a VDO, the figure is removed from the battlefield. So there's no change needed.

Maybe I missed something in the Rip/Kang discussion, but I (and seemingly dok) came away with the opposite idea.

I certainly wouldn't mind that ruling, though. I'd thought that was the case for a while before the Rip/Kang discussion, and that's how I was testing the Sports Car initially.

quozl September 6th, 2018 12:57 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Yeah, I was noticing some confusion there. We need to settle that first.

A point to consider: if Joker and the like are overpowered in a vehicle, they would also be overpowered (perhaps even more overpowered!) as Nick Fury's drop team.

Ronin September 6th, 2018 12:58 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Nick can only Drop Agents, though. Kang (II) is the generalist version you need to worry about!

quozl September 6th, 2018 12:59 PM

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread (Initial Testing)
 
Good call. I forgot about it being restricted to just agents.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:41 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2021 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.