New allied infantry

RattusKid · 12-22-2002, 11:42 PM

For the allies i have an idea. They go off finess and having more info than enemy so how about this infantry:

Actor-$50
Primary= sucky gun, real bad
Secondary=Spy's disguise weapon only with negative damage.

So this cheap infantry can look like a bigger badder one. e.g. SEALs and Tanya or something else. This faking forces idea is right for the allies i think.

Godwin · 12-23-2002, 05:02 AM

so u ask why do i think?

i think it's a stupid idea, u still have to train one of those infantry to replicate its image, so u still waste money, and infantry dont really scare people either, tanya? send aircraft, seals? send tanks... then they'll know your stupid trick....

TangyTom · 12-23-2002, 05:52 AM

Give him credit - its a unique and original idea. You can make fake structures, why not fake infantry.

Aside from that, I agree - it sucks. I'd rather have an actual SEAL or Tanya......although I rarely use either anyway. :|

If you do use it, give him Pistola .

RattusKid · 12-23-2002, 11:23 AM

I knew it was an odd idea. However one could also use the original mirage tanks weapon to disguise a tank in a similar manner. <That idea was clazzy's

TGMTE · 12-23-2002, 01:02 PM

Mirage infantry?

goliedude · 12-23-2002, 07:16 PM

You guys, no. I was actually thinking of the same type of thing a while ago, except with vehicles. Imagine....
Player #1: "Holy Crap! 12 apocs! (atually 12 $50 tricks) Must concentrate on them."
Player #2: Sends one tanya to finish him off while player #1 doesn't even her.
Player #1: "That fool tricked me. Arghhhhhhh! @#%$!"

Edit: or maybe even the opposite, a very powerful unit disguised as a wussy one.

MORPHLING · 12-31-2002, 03:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by goliedude

You guys, no. I was actually thinking of the same type of thing a while ago, except with vehicles. Imagine....
Player #1: "Holy Crap! 12 apocs! (atually 12 $50 tricks) Must concentrate on them."
Player #2: Sends one tanya to finish him off while player #1 doesn't even her.
Player #1: "That fool tricked me. Arghhhhhhh! @#%$!"

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

shane · 02-13-2003, 10:09 AM

[quote="goliedude"]You guys, no. I was actually thinking of the same type of thing a while ago, except with vehicles. Imagine....
Player #1: "Holy Crap! 12 apocs! (atually 12 $50 tricks) Must concentrate on them."
Player #2: Sends one tanya to finish him off while player #1 doesn't even her.
Player #1: "That fool tricked me. Arghhhhhhh! @#%$!"

That is a good idea! I am ashamed to say that I would fall for it, as long as I didn't know tanya (or worse) was around. But that may not work for those players that turtle behind massive defense.

ComradeJ · 02-14-2003, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by goliedude

You guys, no. I was actually thinking of the same type of thing a while ago, except with vehicles. Imagine....
Player #1: "Holy Crap! 12 apocs! (atually 12 $50 tricks) Must concentrate on them."
Player #2: Sends one tanya to finish him off while player #1 doesn't even her.
Player #1: "That fool tricked me. Arghhhhhhh! @#%$!"

Err... If Player #2 could train Tanya he'd be Allied and Allies can't build Apoc's! If player #1 is that dumb he deserves to lose!

OneWingedAngel · 02-14-2003, 05:21 PM

uhh... No, there isn't a tank disguise coding of any parsable kind.