No rocket launcher in t3 please

Replace it with a bashful hummingbird with a bifocal and top hat. He'll buzz around your enemies spelling out patterns with soap bubble trails he shoots from his tail. We'll call him Sir Humbleton and he'll be the governer of Bumburble -- kidnapped in a vicious plot by an irate weasel sneaky bloodhound. Only there's no way in dogwater they'll get away with this loopy scheme! ho ho ho!


It'd be less silly that way.
 
Last edited:
Sir Lucius said:
Replace it with a bashful hummingbird with a bifocal and top hat. He'll buzz around your enemies spelling out patterns with soap bubble trails he shoots from his tail. We'll call him Sir Humbleton and he'll be the governer of Bumburble -- kidnapped in a vicious plot by an irate weasel sneaky bloodhound. Only there's no way in dogwater they'll get away with this loopy scheme! ho ho ho!


It'd be less sill that way.
Click to expand...

:rofl:
 
Depends on if vehicles are overpowering or not. Rocket launchers should just be for taking down vehicles, not people.

So basically tone down the vehicles so that there will be no need for the rocket launchers.
 
Sir Lucius said:
Replace it with a bashful hummingbird with a bifocal and top hat. He'll buzz around your enemies spelling out patterns with soap bubble trails he shoots from his tail. We'll call him Sir Humbleton and he'll be the governer of Bumburble -- kidnapped in a vicious plot by an irate weasel sneaky bloodhound. Only there's no way in dogwater they'll get away with this loopy scheme! ho ho ho!


It'd be less silly that way.
Click to expand...

:lol: :rofl:

Hilarious
 
snow said:
no rocket launchers or vechiles
Click to expand...

we gotta have rocket launchers if theres vehicles, and marweas already said (or thrax) there will be...


It would be hard as hell to kill a shrike with no rockets, if the shrike is coming at you at least you can rocket it now, if its flyin away no chance in hell, but its a "necessary evil" right now, for balancing issues.
 
Sir Lucius said:
Replace it with a bashful hummingbird with a bifocal and top hat. He'll buzz around your enemies spelling out patterns with soap bubble trails he shoots from his tail. We'll call him Sir Humbleton and he'll be the governer of Bumburble -- kidnapped in a vicious plot by an irate weasel sneaky bloodhound. Only there's no way in dogwater they'll get away with this loopy scheme! ho ho ho!


It'd be less silly that way.
Click to expand...

Sorry bro, Nintendo has that copyrighted.
 
Locke355 said:
having vehicles does not mean you need rockets.
Click to expand...

This is true. However if the vehicles are anything like t2 base was the vehicles would be ridiculously overpowered (again).

The most fun games I ever had in t1 and t2 (classic) has at a very very minimum vehicles. I certainly wouldn't be sad to see them just scrap vehicles.
 
rocket launchers would be alright if they could not be used to lock onto players

having to carry "flare" grenades at all times was stupid
 
TheGhost said:
we gotta have rocket launchers if theres vehicles, and marweas already said (or thrax) there will be...


It would be hard as hell to kill a shrike with no rockets, if the shrike is coming at you at least you can rocket it now, if its flyin away no chance in hell, but its a "necessary evil" right now, for balancing issues.
Click to expand...

I believe he was joking...
 
TheGhost said:
we gotta have rocket launchers if theres vehicles, and marweas already said (or thrax) there will be...
Click to expand...
Just for fun let's examine that comment, shall we?. Yes, lets.

T1. Vehicles. No Rocket launcher. Not once did I hear LoLnOw or Vox bitch about the lack of a rocket launcher. So, you can have vehicles and no rocket launcher.
 
Back
Top