« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Play balance  (Read 1038 times)

Offline LtMagee

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 257
Play balance
« Reply #15 on: December 20, 2003, 11:25:54 AM »
Quote
2. silly: irritatingly silly or time-wasting

Aces High -- Stupid but fun :cool:
Logged

Offline brady

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7055
      • http://personal.jax.bellsouth.net/jax/t/y/tyr88/JG2main.html
Play balance
« Reply #16 on: December 20, 2003, 11:34:18 AM »
Jazz, I generaly use the same MOTD I just make minour changes in it, but since you missed all the changes I will post them again: Added the FM-2 like you said, I added the B26 to the allied side, I added the F4U-1D to A18, I Tweaked the Ack hardness seting from a little bit to make it just under 100 pounds,I incresed VH hardness to 5K. Several map changes were made to adress some minour issue we discovered during the first two go arounds with the map in the CT, in fact their has been 2 map upgrades for this terain, one proiur to the SEA event for it and one afterword, thanks To Kanttori.
Logged

Offline Slash27

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12795
Play balance
« Reply #17 on: December 21, 2003, 09:46:31 PM »
A 150 post thread that has a half dozen of the ushual suspects as the primary contributers is nothing new for a PAC set up, and It ran all week with good numbers, like it has every time I have ran it, both it and the Guadacanal set up consistantly have been the best PAC set up's number's wise we have ran.

  Just because it had good numbers doesnt mean their isnt room for improvement. Is there any other CT staffer intrested in running this set up? It would be nice to have a forum with some one more open minded to some of the "ushual suspects"* input.


*a.k.a.  players
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
« previous next »